World of Ham Radio 1997/WOHR97_AmSoft_(1997-02-01).iso/usenets/1995_10/_antenna.txt

Text File | 1997-02-01 | 888KB | 21,311 lines

The World of Ham Radio CD-ROM



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!ip136.flg.primenet.com!bisayan
From: [e-mail] (Mogollon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Does black dye spoil polyethelene?
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 1995 18:38:30 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <44725m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip136.flg.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <44725m$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kevin Ferguson) writes:
>Path:
>nnrp3.news.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!nntpgate.primenet.com!news.sprintl
>ink.net!in2.uu.net!news.erinet.com!bug.rahul.net!a2i!mack.rt66.com!usenet
>From: [e-mail] (Kevin Ferguson)
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>Subject: Does black dye spoil polyethelene?
>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 14:12:59 -0600 (MDT)
>Organization: Engineering International Inc., Public Internet Access
>Lines: 24
>Message-ID: <44725m$[e-mail]>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.153.24.32
>X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.38
>Xref: nntpdist.primenet.com rec.radio.amateur.antenna:15595
>Xref: nnrp3.news.primenet.com rec.radio.amateur.antenna:15595



>I am in the "gathering parts" stage of building a loop antenna.

>I like the "trombone" capacitor idea a lot.

>I have found that 3/4" black polyethelene irrigation pipe fits nicely
>between 1/2" and 3/4" copper tubing (force fit on the 1/2, easy slip
>in the 3/4).   This seems a lot easier than rolling sheet material
>over the inner cap plate as the QST article suggested.

>Now the question:

>I am unable to find a source of "natural" colored poly tubing this
>big.  Does anyone have information on the dielectric strength, and
>absorption characteristics of black dyed polyethelene?

>Do they use carbon to get the black color??  If so, then it surely
>spoils the plastic as a dielectric.

>Does anyone KNOW where I can get large natural polyethelen or teflon
>tubing?

>KO0B   QRT

They use CARBON BLACK to color polyethelene. I think less than 2%.
Couldn't you just use a megohmeter to measure the dielectric?
rob wb7qdq


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!sanjuan.amtsgi.bc.ca!salmon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft A3 Traps
Date: Mon,  2 Oct 1995 12:40:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
References: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 21

H>I bought a used A3 tri-band beam from someone on the net. Unfortunately,
H>the traps have no markings on them. The traps for 15m are of two types.
H>The traps for the director are different from those on the driven element
H>and the reflector.

When I bought my A3S, I had to take it down so I marked where everything
went.  But by looking at the instructions, there are 6 10 meter traps
whose ends are the same size tube.  There are 2 15 meter traps for the
Director, and 4 for the DE and Reflector.  The end tubes are smaller at
one end than the other.  Looking at the picture, the Director trap is
longer than the Driven element and the Reflector.

When installing them, make sure the holes are pointing down.  Good Luck!
     ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
     ║    Clinton Peebles  VE7-KNL                          ║
     ║    SYSOP - Salmon Siding Saloon BBS - 604-357-9942   ║
     ║    Internet: [e-mail]        ║
     ║    Packet Radio: VE7KNL@VE7CW.#SEBC.BC.CAN.NOAM      ║
     ╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ I can't see it, but it looks good!


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:04 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!ip113.phx.primenet.com!w5gyj
From: [e-mail] (James E. Bromley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: All band cw antenna
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 1995 18:27:05 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <439jc5$[e-mail]><43oo0a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4499kk$[e-mail]> <44f9bf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip113.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]


>[e-mail] (Dana Myers) wrote:
>>
>> A really neat way to build an antenna that is wideband with respect
>> to CW sending speed is to use multicolored wire.  Usually you just
>> get the solid color with a stripe kind at swap meets, and this
>> works ok, but you can special order wire that has equal sized
>> stripes of several colors.

In article <44ff1v$[e-mail]> DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> writes:

>If the stripes are marked in a spiral fashion aroud the wire, this
>would, I believe, be equivalent to inductive loading.  Does anyone
>know if this loading lengthens the dots more or the dashes more?
>Or both?  This might have some impact on the max speed available.

I think we have the Coffman effect at work here (see: Coffman,et al,
"CW Linked to Brain Damage", rec.radio.amateur.policy.any-night-of-the week)

Antenna wire color has *NO* effect on transmitted radiotelegraphy
below 1 GHz.  The only thing that will affect CW transmissions
from wire antennas is the proper application of antenna wax from
a reputable supplier.  Usenet guidelines prohibit commercial appeals
in rec.* groups, but the Acme Roadrunner Entrapment Corporation
offers a complete line.

73,

W5GYJ




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!castle.nando.net!chapel103.nando.net!user
From: [e-mail] (John Marshall)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 75 ohm parallel coax
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 1995 22:02:30 -0400
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 37
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: chapel103.nando.net

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (BOB ROACH) wrote:

(quoting [e-mail] (Hank Horton )
> HH>-I am new to radios and to internet so please pardon if I out of line.
> HH>-I have seen in arrl's book on ant. that you can use 2 75 ohm coax in
> HH>-parallel to feed your ant isnt that 37.5 ohms ?  how do you over come
>
> Hi Hank,
>
> You are thinking of what happens to parallel resisters with DC or
> extremely low frequency (60 Hz).  At RF frequencies everything changes.

Not everything changes, Bob.  Resistances in parallel work the same way at
10GHz as at DC or 60Hz. Real-world resistors may confuse the issue because
they include inductance and capacitance whose effect becomes more
significant at higher frequencies. Of course we're supposed to be talking
about transmission lines here rather than resistors.

Actually, transmission lines work the same way. Two EQUAL LENGTHS of RG11
cable, each with a characteristic impedance of 75 ohms, are equivalent to
a single transmission with a characteristic impedance of 37.5 ohms. One
which weighs twice as much and has twice as much loss as a single
(matched) length of RG11.

Taking an intuitive approach to this, think about the Handbook/Antenna
Book explanations of characteristic impedance. Think of the transmission
line as lots of little series L's alternating with shunt C's. A line with
a thin inner conductor (higher L) and large spacing between inner and
outer conductors (smaller C) will have a higher characteristic Z. Compare
pieces of RG11 (75 ohms) and RG8 (50 ohms), or compare their specs in one
of the books. Now think about two parallel cables - all those little L's
in parallel (read half as much L) and all those little C's in parallel
(twice as much C). Gotta be half as much Z0!  And I gotta quit drinking so
much coffee.

73 from John, WA1UPB/4


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 3 Oct 1995 00:18:43 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <44pvh3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44bn7r$[e-mail]> <44c1pg$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44cvub$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44kjhv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44m507$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44mo1d$[e-mail]> <44oq0v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail701.nando.net

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
>    DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
> >Almost there Jack, the inner side of the coax does see a gradient
> >only because it is a transmission line, and is subject to the
> >behavior of a signal traveling down its distributed impedances.
>
> Don, how is that possible?  We know the current through the line is
> the same at input and output.  Given that fact, the voltage amplitude
> at the output (using the same measurement reference point for both)
> cannot be greater than at the input unless the phase between the
> output terminals shifts.

I don't know whether we are thinking of the same thing or not.  Your
statement is true if you look across the input or the output, but I
was refering to the voltage gradient along the line itself, say as
measured on the center conductor at the input side to the center at
the output end.

That is possible and natural because the distributed inductance and
capacitance of a transmission line will create a phase shift in a
signal as you travel along the length of the line.  It will not cause
a change in the magnitude of either the voltage or the current, but
it does rotate the vector, and that in itself will create a voltage
differential between the two vectors and thus a voltage gradient.
There is nothing really unusual here - compare it to the situation
in common 3 phase power distribution where you can measure 117 volts
from neutral to any of the 3 legs, but any two legs measure 208
volts between them.  One must picture a triangle to clearly visualize
the relationship and maintain the proper voltage differences.

>
> I have to say, instinct tells me this isn't true - I want to think
> that the balun isolates the the output voltage from the input, as you
> stated earlier.  It doesn't though.
>
> >My problem with the 1/2 voltage thing is only in that you continue
> >to use the chassis ground as reference even after the balun.
> >I'm not certain this is valid.  I don't have the 'right' answer
> >here, but I think you have a reference shift when you go through
> >a balun.  That is also why I referred to a balun as an isolating
> >device.
>
> I think this is an instinctual concept created by the difficulty in
> visualizing the balun's ability to separate the current function from
> the voltage function.
>
Jack, I may be jumping to conclusions here, but I think your set-up
has posed conditions on the balun outside of the range where
the statement that a balun *forces equal and opposite currents*
remains as a valid statement.

I also think there is a semantics problem with making that statement
in the first place.  I feel it is more correct to look at the system
from the antenna load end.  As I have stated before, there is little
that one can do to change the fact that the current at the ends of
the antenna will be zero.  Everything else just must flow from that
point.  All we can do is make sure we maintain the system at this
stable balance point, and all should be fine and dandy.

The only way a source generator (transmitter and balun in this case)
can force any conditions is for that source to be effectively a zero
impedance source - like the utility line.  If the source has
impedance, the load is usually the factor that determines system behavior the most.
 - My flame suit is on here - I know there are many exceptions.

73,
Don




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:08 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 3 Oct 1995 00:45:50 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <44q13u$[e-mail]>
References: <44p4m4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-10.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:
>  In article <44ocri$[e-mail]>,
>  Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>  >I've missed most of this thread, but these posts seem to show a little
>  >misunderstanding.
>
>  Hi Roy, We have all been wondering where you were when we needed you. :-)
>
>  I ran some of the tests you suggested and got results different from what
>  W2OBJ predicted. With a choke-balun ahead of a 'T' type transmatch which
>  is installed in one side of the line, with a 300 ohm load center-tapped
>  to system ground: The currents were *not* equal out of the balun. However,
>  when I removed the ground from the load center-tap, the currents equalized.
>
>  73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
>
>>>>
 When you remove the path from the load to ground, the currents *have* to be
the same; the current out of one conductor doesn't have anywhere else to go
except through the load and back down the other. (This is why a link coupled
tuner insures equal and opposite currents, too.) I'm still scratching my
head over an offhand comment Tom W8JI made the other day that there's no
difference between putting cores over the input and output of the transmatch.
If the shield is intact, and if there's coax at the output to put cores over,
he's correct. I'm trying to analyze what the difference might be between
putting a piece of coax at the output with beads on it, then connecting the
coax to the twinlead, and by putting the cores directly over the twinlead.
But as usual, I'm swamped and haven't had time to look carefully at it. Yet.
<sigh>. There's something to be learned, here.

73,
Roy, W7EL



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:09 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 3 Oct 1995 00:48:32 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <44q190$[e-mail]>
References: <44m3l7$[e-mail]> <44mipl$[e-mail]> <44nhj3$[e-mail]> <44oq1o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail701.nando.net

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
> SNIP...
> >Now, what is my assessment of Jack's predicament?  I now believe a
> >better job of matching would occur with the simple replacement of
> >the choke balun with an isolating 1:1 RF transformer.
>
> Unfortunately, capacitive coupling from input to output will probably
> prevent its ability to completely divorce the line from the input
> reference.  Additionally, the electrical center of the output
> winding still won't be the same as the electrical center of the
> transmission line, because of the insertion of the tuner.  The
> question is whether bringing the electrical center of the line
> towards ground will upset the currents being supplied from the
> balun/tuner.  My suspicion is that it will.
>
The capacitive coupling should not be a worry.  I did not advocate
the use of a balun, only a 1:1 coupling device.  A balun has a hard
ground at the center of the balanced side.  This hard ground is what
you need to avoid like the plague.  Remember that your system is
only fully balanced from the output of the tuner out to the antenna.
To work in concert with this situation, the tuner input must operate
to one side of the balance point.  Placing the balun at the input
TRIES to force it to the center, but the system doesn't want to
follow, so they 'fight' each other.  Removing the ground at the
balun electrical center will allow the center to establish itself
electrically.

There is one problem with this 'no-ground' approach that I am suggesting,
and it is VERY important - there is no low impedance path for lightning
protection.  Should you try this, make sure you provide some form
of lightning protection like a gap on each side of the transmission
line just outside the shack entrance.  I have successfully used the
gap in plain auto spark plugs - screw them into a grounded plate and
attach the feeder wires to the tips - use non-resistor plugs, and adjust
the gap for no arcover with your highest power level.


>BTW - I have been convinced that the much advertized statement that
> >a choke balun 'forces' the currents to be equal and opposite is not
> >true in the general case.  I believe Jack took it that extra step
> >where the statement becomes untrue.
>
> As long as there is insignificant current flowing on the outside of
> the shield, it *must* deliver equal currents.  Once the RF enters the
> coax, the circuit paths on the inner shield and center conductor are
> in series with the load.  If the load is resistive (which it is
> because we adjust the tuner for 1:1 at the transmitter), the current
> through the balun must be the same everywhere.
>
> Yes?  No?
>
I had to think about that one quite a bit Jack.  What you are saying
IS true for normal RF applications, but as I stated above, you are driving
a not quite balanced load at the output of the balun, and it is not
not a single ended type of unbalanced either, it is somewhere in
between.  That is why you should either replace the balun with an
isolator or switch to a balanced tuner.

73,
Don W3FPR


> 73,
>
> Jack  WB3U



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:10 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!CC.UMontreal.CA!cdec.polymtl.ca!ts-1-02
From: [e-mail] (Philippe Chayer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wind resistance of Cushcraft R7 antenna
Date: 3 Oct 1995 02:01:44 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <44q5i8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts-1-02.slip.polymtl.ca
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Hi,

Here is my question:


My amateur radio group will be putting this new antenna on top of the
school next week and we are kind of worried that it won't pass the
winter... We are considering guying it about 2/3 up with 3 Dacron
ropes, as it's been recommended here, but will it resist winter
storms, winds of 100+Kph(60mph) and cold down to -30 Celcius (-25
Farenheight), and sometimes all of them combined ( the school is on
top of a small, but lonely mountain)? Also, will it resits the UV from
our friend the sun ? (not for 10 years, I know, but how about a couple
of years before we have to change the ropes ?)

Well, that's a lot of questions, And I hope I will get answers...

Thanks in advance !



Philippe Chayer
[e-mail]

----cut here--------------------------------------------------------------------
signature under construction !!!
=> This space for Rent !!<=


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft A3 Traps
Date: 3 Oct 1995 02:20:15 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <44q6kv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44pgde$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail519.nando.net

[e-mail] (Garth Wiscombe) wrote:
>
> Steve Hideg ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : I bought a used A3 tri-band beam from someone on the net. Unfortunately,
> SNIP
 > : Does anyone have an idea on how to identify these?
 >
 > : Thanks.
 >
 > : --Steve Hideg
 > :   [e-mail]
 > Hi Steve,
 > I would call Cushcraft and ask them what to look for in identifing your
 > coils they helped me out with an AV5 when I needed help and some answers.
 >
If a call to Cushcraft is no help, I would determine the resonant
frequency of all of the traps.  My guess would be that the two with
the highest resonant frequency would be the ones for the director.
They should be resonant somewhere about the 15 meter band.  If not,
the designers may have used some kind on 'magic' for this antenna,
and then all bets are off.

73,
Don W3FPR



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:12 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!genmagic!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 3 Oct 1995 02:44:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 49
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <44qm3v$[e-mail]>
References: <44q13u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


Hi Roy,

In article <44q13u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

> I'm still scratching my
>head over an offhand comment Tom W8JI made the other day that there's no
>difference between putting cores over the input and output of the
transmatch.

Actually, it is one of the main points I was trying to make. My statement
was: Placing a choke balun at the input of an unbalanced tuner (floating
the ground side) will present the same choking mode voltage and choking
requirements as simply having the balun on the output of the tuner. One
side of the balun remains directly connected between the antenna feedline
and the station "ground" in either case.

>If the shield is intact, and if there's coax at the output to put cores
over,
>he's correct.

Or parallel wires! ;-)

> I'm trying to analyze what the difference might be between
>putting a piece of coax at the output with beads on it, then connecting
the
>coax to the twinlead, and by putting the cores directly over the
twinlead.

Good coax shouldn't and doesn't hurt anything at amateur power levels
(such a short length). The only danger is excessive line heating or
arcing. I successfully use a string of beads over two parallel center
conductors from teflon RG-58 cable at the tuner output with 1500 watt
power levels with excellent results.

The only difference moving the balun to the input of the tuner and
floating the whole tuner (or the internal common) would make is the
impedance changes in that four foot length of wire could be decreased. The
number of beads required, the heating of the beads, the common mode
voltage across the balun would remain exactly the same. Things like RF on
the tuner case, stray capacitance in equipment unbalancing the system, and
hand capacitance effects would likely get worse.

I don't think the move to the input kills performance, I just think there
is no big advantage for the complication, and some incidentals likely get
worse.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:13 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: FERRITE COAX?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <44mk5j$[e-mail]> <44n0fa$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 02:46:08 GMT
Lines: 16

Hrrrmmmf. Here I attempt to tickle the intellect of this elite group by
putting forth one of the most profound thoughts and what do I get? Poppycock!

Do you not realize that ferrite coated coax would eliminate the whoes of
thousands of unhappy hams? Just think of the ramifications, NO more RFI,
Burnt fingers, scorched lips, TVI. NO more baluns. I could go on and on
but alas, there seems to be no one technically advanced enough to carry
the ball.

Go ahead if you will, make jest but I just bet one of you birds jumped on
the idea and is already brewing some liquid ferrite in his secret lab,
getting ready to smear it on some coax and dreaming of all the millions
he will make from his new invention. Shame on the rest of you! Moth
balls, rabbits, ferrets, fiddlesticks.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:14 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger A. Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Lock-ups
Date: 3 Oct 1995 03:41:05 GMT
Organization: Telex Communications, Inc.
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <44qbch$k1b$[e-mail]>

Does anyone else experience LOCK-UPS when you try to read your
own post?  I am using version 1.3.1 of WinCIM from CompuServe.

73, Roger WB0DGF


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:15 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!van-bc!io.org!torfree!ai641
From: [e-mail] (Gary Chiasson)
Subject: 9913 coax manufacturer
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 04:13:45 GMT
Lines: 8

How many and what manufacturers make the 9913 coaxial cable ?
Is there better 9913 than others ?
Is the RG 8/U TYPE also called the 9913 cable ?
I know Belden and Carol make 9913.


G.C.



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Balun Analysis - Part 1 & 2
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 95 05:09:37 GMT
Lines: 108
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

The following is a partial repost of two of my previous explanations for
the functioning of the input balun in a single-ended tuner.  Both
examples are based on the use of a coaxial, ferrite bead balun.

PART 1 explains why the RF voltage at the output terminals of the balun
is independent of feedline impedance (voltage).

PART 2 demonstrates that the "choking voltage" across the balun is reduced
when it is located at the input of the tuner.

Each Part has been refined and expanded from the original posts and is
accompanied by notes and additional conclusions.  Comments are welcome.

----------------------------------------------------
     PART 1 (Isolation from feedline impedance)
----------------------------------------------------

TX HOT----a---Coax Center-----b----Resistor---|GND
TX GND----c---Choked Shield---d----Resistor---|GND

A)  The voltage from b to TX GND and from d to TX GND will be identical
if the resistors are the same value (or if their common connection is
removed from ground).

B)  In order for the transmitter to see 1:1 SWR, the total load across
b and d must be 50 ohms.

C)  If the load across b and d is 50 ohms, then the voltage across
b and d will be identical to the input voltage across a and c.

D)  Given that the voltage across b and d is the same as across a and c,
and the load is balanced with respect to chassis ground (equal or
ungrounded resistors), then the voltage from b to TX GND, and from d to
TX GND, must be 1/2 the voltage from a to c.  This statement is inviolate
when SWR is 1:1 at the transmitter.

          NOTES and CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The balun will be terminated with a 50 ohm resistive load if the
tuner is adjusted for 1:1 SWR at the transmitter.

2.  The impedance of each balun output terminal to TX GND is 25 ohms.
If the load seen by the balun is balanced, the ferrite beads need only
have sufficient Z appropriate to that impedance.

3.  Voltage at the output terminals of the balun is not directly related
to transmission line feedpoint impedance.

4.  The voltage at the output terminals of the balun will diverge if the
impedance to TX GND at each terminal is not equal.

5.  The output of the balun/tuner as a whole will not be symmetrical.
Voltage on the feedline wire fed directly by the balun will be 1/2 the
voltage at the input to the balun.  Voltage on the feedline wire fed by
the tuner will equal feedline I*Z minus 1/2 the input voltage to the
balun, where I is feedline current and Z is feedline impedance.

6.  Voltages applied to each side of the balanced transmission line by
this system are not equal with respect to TX GND.  Therefore, coupling
to TX GND at any point past the balun will cause the balun to see
unequal impedances, and the voltage on its output terminals will diverge.


----------------------------------------------------
     PART 2 (Reduction in choking voltage)
----------------------------------------------------

Regarding choking voltage, compare the above (Part 1) to what happens
when the balun is at the output of the tuner:

TX HOT----a---Tuner---b----Coax Center-----d----1K Resistor---|GND
TX GND----c----------------Choked Shield---e----1K Resistor---|GND

In this circuit, a 5 watt transmitter will produce 15.8V RMS across
a-c, and 100V RMS across d-e.  The RF voltage from d to GND and from
e to GND will be identical, and will be 1/2 the total, or 50V RMS.
Therefore, the choking voltage on the balun from e to c will also be
50V RMS.

Using this same example but placing the balun at the input of the tuner,
the choking voltage will be very much reduced.  As shown in Part 1, the
output voltage on each side of the balun will be 1/2 the 50 ohm input,
or approximately 7.9V RMS to ground.

Thus, the choking voltage has been reduced from 50V RMS to 7.9V RMS by
moving the balun to the input.

          NOTES and CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Placing the balun at the input of the tuner effectively divorces the
balun from the high voltage normally seen on both sides of a high
impedance, symmetrically-fed transmission line.

2.  As stated in Part 1, unequal impedances at the output terminals of
the balun cause unequal voltages to appear.  This will effectively
increase the choking voltage across the balun if the voltage at the
output terminal connected to the shield rises.

3.  The worst-case imbalance results from a short between the output of
the tuned components and TX GND.  Under those conditions, full feedline
voltage will be present at the balun's shield output.

4.  The least harmful imbalance results from a short between the shield
output of the balun and TX GND.  Under those conditions, zero choking
voltage appears across the ferrite beads.

----------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!nwlink.com!usenet
From: maurice norris <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV problem/modification idea
Date: 3 Oct 1995 06:14:59 GMT
Organization: Northwest Link
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <44qkd3$[e-mail]>
References: <446gm1$[e-mail]> <44acbe$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44dbdj$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44nq5e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port18.annex2.nwlink.com

> Mark is correct as to the G5RV construction and operation.  It operates
> quite well with the appropriate tuner (balanced).
>
> Good luck on your project.
>
> Dave
> N8CLF
>
    Thanks Guys:
  You gave me the answers I have been looking for.


         Mo Norris KC7EXG


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:19 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!microvst.demon.co.uk
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 75 ohm parallel coax
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 95 06:55:44 GMT
Organization: Microvest Limited, London
Lines: 16
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: microvst.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "John Marshall" writes:

> Actually, transmission lines work the same way. Two EQUAL LENGTHS of RG11
> cable, each with a characteristic impedance of 75 ohms, are equivalent to
> a single transmission with a characteristic impedance of 37.5 ohms. One
> which weighs twice as much and has twice as much loss as a single
> (matched) length of RG11.

How are you defining loss in "twice as much loss"?

--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:20 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 95 07:43:14 GMT
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44bn7r$[e-mail]> <44c1pg$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44cvub$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44kjhv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44m507$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44mo1d$[e-mail]> <44oq0v$[e-mail]> <44pvh3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>I don't know whether we are thinking of the same thing or not.
               <<snip>>
>That is possible and natural because the distributed inductance and
>capacitance of a transmission line will create a phase shift in a
>signal as you travel along the length of the line.  It will not cause
>a change in the magnitude of either the voltage or the current,
               <<snip>>

No, we weren't talking about the same thing, so that's cleared up. You've
brought up another point though.  Cecil's measurement of currents that
weren't 180 degs out of phase across the output of the balun really
disturbs me.  When current is input to the center conductor of the coax,
it is the fields set up by that current that *create* the equal and
opposite current on the inner shield.  So, how can they ever be out of
phase?  An explanation of this would be very helpful to me at this point.

>Jack, I may be jumping to conclusions here, but I think your set-up
>has posed conditions on the balun outside of the range where
>the statement that a balun *forces equal and opposite currents*
>remains as a valid statement.

Well, the only condition I've really applied to the balun proper is that
the beads must sufficiently impede the flow of RF on the outside of the
shield.  Are you saying that something external to the balun in this
circuit is degrading its internal ability to do this?

>I feel it is more correct to look at the system from the antenna
>load end.

That's been the primary cause of several basic disagreements in this
thread.  The problem is, in this circuit, that approach assumes things
that aren't true.  Take for example Tom's assertion that the balun sees
the high voltage of the feedline because it's directly connected to one
side.  That appears true if you look at it from the feedline in, but only
because that perspective doesn't account for the fact that this circuit
applies non-symmetrical voltages to the line.  The voltage applied to the
line at the direct connection to the balun is actually much lower than it
would be in a symmetrically-fed system.

BTW, this is just an example to illustrate the misunderstanding - as you
know, Tom still doesn't agree with me on this point.  :)

>The only way a source generator (transmitter and balun in this case)
>can force any conditions is for that source to be effectively a zero
>impedance source - like the utility line.  If the source has
>impedance, the load is usually the factor that determines system behavior
>the most.
> - My flame suit is on here - I know there are many exceptions.

That's the basis of my concern regarding the proximity of the antenna to
ground, relative to its ability to unbalance the voltages at the
output of the balun.

No flames from this end.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:21 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 95 07:43:32 GMT
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <44m3l7$[e-mail]> <44mipl$[e-mail]> <44nhj3$[e-mail]> <44oq1o$[e-mail]> <44q190$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>There is one problem with this 'no-ground' approach that I am suggesting,
>and it is VERY important - there is no low impedance path for lightning
>protection.

This is absolutely correct, and it was one of my worries when I was still
using the isolation transformer.  In fact, I posted something about at one
point, asking for ideas.

>I have successfully used the gap in plain auto spark plugs - screw them
>into a grounded plate and attach the feeder wires to the tips - use
>non-resistor plugs, and adjust the gap for no arcover with your highest
>power level.

That's an excellent idea and one I haven't heard before.  Do you prefer
Champion or Autolite?  :)

>> As long as there is insignificant current flowing on the outside of
>> the shield, it *must* deliver equal currents.  Once the RF enters the
>> coax, the circuit paths on the inner shield and center conductor are
>> in series with the load.  If the load is resistive (which it is
>> because we adjust the tuner for 1:1 at the transmitter), the current
>> through the balun must be the same everywhere.
>>
>> Yes?  No?
>>
>I had to think about that one quite a bit Jack.  What you are saying
>IS true for normal RF applications, but as I stated above, you are driving
>a not quite balanced load at the output of the balun, and it is not
>not a single ended type of unbalanced either, it is somewhere in
>between.  That is why you should either replace the balun with an
>isolator or switch to a balanced tuner.

Yeooww!  You've gone from saying that it should work fine in the real
world, to scrapping the whole idea!  Are you still wearing that
flame suit?  :)

Actually, *if* there's a current balance problem inherent to this design,
it might simply be the parallel component in the tuner.  If so, the
isolation transformer won't help.

I think any decision at this point can wait until after I run some tests
for myself.  If the current balance isn't acceptable, I'll have to try
and determine the best way to deal with it.  That will probably start a
whole 'nother thread.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:22 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.sunbelt.net!usenet
From: Joseph Colson III <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m Quad Antenna
Date: 3 Oct 1995 11:57:22 GMT
Organization: SunBelt.Net
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <44r8f2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-5.r1.lalafc.sunbelt.net

Im looking for plans to a 2m Quad Antenna.  Im interested in building
one.  Any information will be greatly appreciated.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:23 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou2!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: FERIITE COAX?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou2.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <44obkn$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 12:20:46 GMT
Lines: 15

: You can get ferrite paint from Emerson & Cuming. Also ferrite-loaded
: silicone rubber. We used them to damp unwanted modes and reflections in
: high-speed samplers, but I think their intended application is for stealth
: technology.

There ya go. now where can i get information about Emerson/Cuming?
Unwanted modes and reflections is exactly what we are trying to
eliminate. Ferrite paint could be used on coax if it will stick.
For those trying to "float" their antenna tuners, just give them a good
coat of this stuff.

Let's hear more and keep the brainstorm going. It may sound far out but
so did a lot of things 100 years ago.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:24 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "info on gap antennas??"
Date: 3 Oct 95 13:02:47 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

File on does not exist.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:24 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "info on gap antennas??"
Date: 3 Oct 95 13:02:48 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

File gap does not exist.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:25 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "info on gap antennas??"
Date: 3 Oct 95 13:02:50 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

File antennas?? does not exist.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:26 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!g0tik.demon.co.uk
From: [e-mail] (Chris Pemberton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SGC SG230 Smartuner: Any good? Anybody use one?
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 1995 14:46:41 GMT
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: g0tik.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: g0tik.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99b.112

Thanks for reading this.
I am contemplating buying one of these devices and wonder if any one
has one themselves and if so how good is it?
Have you perhaps heard bad reports about them or good?
Any comments would be appreciated either by E-mail or via the group.
Thanks once again - Chris G0TIK
--
Chris Pemberton.
Freelance Sound Engineer.
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:27 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to "float" transmatch
Date: 3 Oct 1995 16:30:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <44s6i0$[e-mail]>
References: <44qlsr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <44qlsr$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

>
>Please correct me if I misunderstand. If you put a dipole in free space,
>with a source at the center, then hang a 1/4 wavelength wire at right
angles
>to the antenna from one of the source terminals, current will flow in the
>added wire, and the currents in the other two wires won't be equal.
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

That's correct Roy. That's exactly what I am saying, and exactly what
happens. Current in one leg will decrease, current in the other will
increase.

The fact the antenna is near earth has nothing to do with the requirement
to have a balun. The baun is required because the dipole EVEN IN SPACE
will establish it's own electrical center, and a pretty stiff one at that.

Secondary points are:
A dipole can not be represented as a single floating resistor for the
purposes of this discussion.

Moving the balun to the input of an unbalanced (even floating) tuner does
not "help a lick" with the choking mode problem, nor reduce the choking
mode voltage across the balun one bit. One end of the balun remains
connected to the feedline, and both windings have the same end to end
volatge as they have if the balun is at the output terminals of the tuner.
Only the out of phase voltages and currents are modified.

RF does not move to the inside of the shield of a coaxial cable because of
skin effect. While it is necessary that the shield be considerably thicker
than the skin depth at the operating frequency, the mechanism that moves
the current to the inside is the opposite phase current on the center
conductor. Without that, it's all back out on the outside, skin effect or
not.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!noc.near.net!sunfish.hi.com!brainiac.hi.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Steve Byan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: APS coating on Copperweld
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 1995 16:36:59 -0400
Organization: Hitachi Computer Products, Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: brainiac.hi.com

Radiokit used to sell Copperweld with an "Anti-Precipitation Static"
coating. Anyone have any idea what this coating is? Is it simply a
UV-resistant insulation? Who makes it?

Thanks,
-Steve

--
Steve Byan                                  internet: [e-mail]
Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc.
1601 Trapelo Road                           phone: [phone]
Waltham, MA 02154                           FAX: [phone]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!castle.nando.net!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (John Marshall)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 75 ohm parallel coax
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 1995 18:04:49 -0400
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <johnmars-0310951804490001@152.52.44.20>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.52.44.20

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
wrote:

> How are you defining loss in "twice as much loss"?
>
> --
>    Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM

Incorrectly!
I read your reply this afternoon and when I reconsidered, I realized the
loss in parallel lines is the same as in a single line.  When I got home
found a nice email from Tom Bruhns <[e-mail]> in which he
anticipated my reconsideration (explained my error). Thanks, Tony and Tom,
and I'm sorry if I misled anyone.

73,
John, WA1UPB/4


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:29 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: 9913 coax manufacturer
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 18:10:49 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 20

Gary Chiasson ([e-mail]) wrote:
: How many and what manufacturers make the 9913 coaxial cable ?
: Is there better 9913 than others ?
: Is the RG 8/U TYPE also called the 9913 cable ?
: I know Belden and Carol make 9913.

Well, "9913" is the Belden part number for a particular line with
helical polyethelene dielectric.  Lots of manufactureres make very
similar line, though generally under their own part number.

It's pretty good line but has some problems:  it's not easy to get
connectors properly attached and secure enough to stay put, and the line is
prone to getting water inside, through condensation if not through
direct entry.  If you are willing to pay a bit more, you can get some
very good low loss lines using foam-type dielectrics that have less
of these two problems.  Sorry, I don't have specific manufacturers and
type numbers handy.  Surely someone else will suggest them...

73, K7ITM



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913 coax manufacturer
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 95 19:24:30 GMT
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) wrote:

>It's pretty good line but has some problems:  it's not easy to get
>connectors properly attached and secure enough to stay put, and the line
>is prone to getting water inside, through condensation if not through
>direct entry.

In MMDS systems (2.5 GHz), air-dielectric line like this is *never*
installed without a dehydrator.  Different types of dehydrators are
available, but the automatic models maintain a constant pressure of a few
PSI in the line.  The air they supply is filtered through an internal
dessicant chamber which is also automatically dried periodically.

This may not be as critical at HF or VHF, but the conductors within the
line *will* eventually corrode from condensaton if it is filled with
non-filtered air.

>If you are willing to pay a bit more, you can get some very good low
>loss lines using foam-type dielectrics that have less of these two
>problems.

That's why companies like Andrew also make foam cable for MMDS and above,
some of it quite large.  Despite increased loss, foam dielectric lines
using closed-cell foam are the only proper cable for systems that for
some reason do not warrant use of a dehydrator.

As an aside to this, some antennas for microwave use are also filled with
foam to eliminate corrosion.  Andrew MMDS antennas are not, which is why
most of their foam dielectric cable employs a hollow center conductor.
The hollow center allows pressurinzing the antenna with dry air, even if
the siituation doesn't warrant pressurizing the line.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:31 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!vectorbd!jpll
From: [e-mail] (Jim Lill)
Subject: Re: "Australian Wideband Dipole"
Organization: Vector Board BBS
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 19:37:06 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <447j92$[e-mail]>
Lines: 14

Andrew Dumas ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Anyone have experience with an antenna called the Australian Wideband Dipole
: in The Antenna Handbook by Orr & Cowan?  It's a 133' long two-wire dipole
: that supposed to cover 3-30 mhz with a low swr throughout.  The two wires are
: separated by 5' aluminum spreaders.

It's SWR claim is optimistic but it's not a bad unit


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Lill      [e-mail]       wa2zkd@wb2psi.#wny.usa.na
PGP Key fingerprint =  AB 0B EF A8 E1 DD 5D E7  47 59 AF F5 67 F5 F9 62



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to "float" transmatch
Date: 3 Oct 1995 20:06:32 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <44s548$[e-mail]>
References: <44pkog$[e-mail]> <44qlsr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <44qlsr$[e-mail]>,
Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Please correct me if I misunderstand. If you put a dipole in free space,
>with a source at the center, then hang a 1/4 wavelength wire at right angles
>to the antenna from one of the source terminals, current will flow in the
>added wire, and the currents in the other two wires won't be equal.

Hi Roy, could you give us your opinion?

Assuming a *perfectly balanced* antenna system over real ground, will putting
impedance in one leg of the ladder-line unbalance the xmission line currents?

Assuming an *unbalanced* antenna system over real ground, can impedance be
put in one leg of the ladder-line to force the xmission line currents to a
balanced condition?

In other words, is it easy or hard to influence the balance or unbalance of
an existing antenna from the transmatch position at a transmitter? The concept
of antenna "inertia" entered the thread about a week ago.

thanks and 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J antenna
Date: 3 Oct 1995 20:08:10 -0700
Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712,714-638-4133,805-294-9338)
Lines: 21
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <446m3h$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44qhm7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com

In article <44qhm7$[e-mail]>,
maurice norris <[e-mail]> wrote:
>    A "J"pole has a 3/4 wave vertical with a 1/4 wave vertical mounted
> 2" making a "J" .On mine I used 1/2" copper pipe with a tee and elbow.
> I also mounted an insulator on top of ths 3/4 wave element and put a
> 1/2 wave element on that and conected the two with a stub made of 8ga
> copper wire making a square loop 18' by 2" bent around the antenna
> like a double halo.
>   If you have any questions please "E" mail me.

Please excuse me and I don't mean to be personal but I thought an error
is worth correcting.  A J-pole is a 1/2 wave vertical fed with an (almost)
1/4 wave long transmission line transformer plus a very short shorted
parallel stub as inductor.  The total length is 3/4 wave length long but
the radiating portion is 1/2 wave length long.

73,

---
Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:35 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: Dipole feed impedance
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 20:58:53 GMT
References: <44pesi$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 41

Richard Karlquist ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Here is a follow up to my own posting.  Tom Bruhns astutely pointed
: out (by email) the following inconsistency.  Thanks, Tom.

.. (text omitted.  See Rick's previous posting.)
: > 5000 ohms for 1/10000.  But the half-wave resonance yields a variation of
: > only a couple ohms over that range of diameter/length ratios.

: The source of this disagreement stems from a semantic problem about what
: we mean by a "half-wave" dipole.  Do we mean a true half-wavelength dipole
: or one which is shortened to look resistive at the feedpoint?  The graph
..(More text deleted...)
: stands.  For a strict construction of the word "half-wave" then Tom has
: correctly quoted Ronold King (who seems to have made of career of these
: calculations.) and King's analysis applies.  As usual, "simple" antennas
: are not simple to analyze.

Well, Rick was being very generous here.  Actually, I was using the same
definition of "resonance" as he:  a point of zero reactance.  At first
when I saw this posting and reviewed the book I had gotten the info from
that I emailed to Rick, I thought I had misread the graphs.  But closer
inspection revealed another graph I hadn't looked at the first time
around, which made it clear that, according to King's model, the
resistance at resonance changed at most about 3 ohms from very fat wires
(100:1 length:diameter) to infinitely thin wires, for this half-wave
antenna.  Further investigation has revealed that the models used by the
two sources appear to differ:  the King one is the "Second-Order
King-Middleton Expansion" and the R.D.E.  reference is _apparently_
based on "Carter zero-order theory" which assumes a simple sinusoidal
distribution of current.  (Why they list feedpoint impedances versus
diameter/length ratio to two decimal places is totally beyond me...)
But feedpoint geometry, both sources acknowledge, has a significant
effect on the _actual_ feedpoint impedance.

I'll second what Rick wrote above:  "As usual, "simple" antennas are not
simple to analyze."

73, Tom -- K7ITM
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.netline.net!srq0b.netline.net!k5cko
From: [e-mail] (Bill Bell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SGC SG230 Smartuner: Any good? Anybody use one?
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 23:43:37
Organization: Netline Communications, Inc.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: srq0b.netline.net
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

>Subject: SGC SG230 Smartuner: Any good? Anybody use one?

>I am contemplating buying one of these devices and wonder if any one
>has one themselves and if so how good is it?
>Have you perhaps heard bad reports about them or good?

Yes, I have a SG230 smarttuner.  I bought it to load the backstay on my
sailboat, but it has never been installed on the boat.  I do use it to load a
longwire (20 feet, maybe that's a shortwire) at about 7 feet in height.

The tuner normally tunes in a few milliseconds, gives the rig a 1:1 match.
Since the antenna is short and low, the performance is about what you would
expect.  I can't be heard in a pileup.  I can carry on qso's when the qrm is
low.




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:37 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!wanda.pond.com!kd3bj!kd3bj.ampr.org!robert
From: [e-mail] (Robert E. Garland)
Subject: Re: home made 2 meter beam
Sender: [e-mail] (News Posting Phantom User)
Nntp-Posting-Host: jupiter.kd3bj.ampr.org
Organization: The KD3BJ Usenet BBS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44hc6k$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44nbs7$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 1995 00:29:51 GMT
Lines: 39

Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:

>[e-mail] (Alfred Lee) wrote:
>>In article <44hc6k$[e-mail]>,
>>[e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.) wrote:
>[snip]
>>>
>>
>>Perhaps we should share the excitement.  Perhaps there are people who
>>can recite the different placement of reflectors/directors to get
>>maximum front to back ratio vs. maximum gain vs. minimum side lobe.
>>But there are also the newbies who cannot tell a vertical yagi from a
>>dipole.  Perhaps we can recall when was the first we build something
>>and it worked as advertised.  I think that is the fun and the best
>>part for the experimenter.

>>73,
>---
>>Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
>>KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'



>Nice post Al... I can remember being a 12 or 13 year old, with NO Elmer around
>and risking my life climbing a tree thinking that if I got the end of the wire just
>another couple of feet higher my (SWL) reception would be greatly improved.


>Needless to say, I was always disappointed.  Isn't it nice when someone has some
>success? From little acorns....

>73, Wes -- N7WS


And then there was Bob, the young teen who watched the plates of his
rectifier diode (tube version) glow red, Red, RED!  Then I learned about
load resistors.




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:38 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us!pbfreenet!p008821b
From: [e-mail] (James Janota)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: jpole simplified
Date: 4 Oct 1995 01:21:02 GMT
Organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Palm Beach
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <44snhu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pbfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]



--

James Janota
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 4 Oct 1995 02:24:41 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <44sr99$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44bn7r$[e-mail]> <44c1pg$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44cvub$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44kjhv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44m507$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44mo1d$[e-mail]> <44oq0v$[e-mail]> <44pvh3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail616.nando.net

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
> No, we weren't talking about the same thing, so that's cleared up. You've
> brought up another point though.  Cecil's measurement of currents that
> weren't 180 degs out of phase across the output of the balun really
> disturbs me.  When current is input to the center conductor of the coax,
> it is the fields set up by that current that *create* the equal and
> opposite current on the inner shield.  So, how can they ever be out of
> phase?  An explanation of this would be very helpful to me at this point.

I'll try to explain below.
>
> >Jack, I may be jumping to conclusions here, but I think your set-up
> >has posed conditions on the balun outside of the range where
> >the statement that a balun *forces equal and opposite currents*
> >remains as a valid statement.
>
> Well, the only condition I've really applied to the balun proper is that
> the beads must sufficiently impede the flow of RF on the outside of the
> shield.  Are you saying that something external to the balun in this
> circuit is degrading its internal ability to do this?
>
Yes.  see what follows.

I think I can answer both your questions at once, because they are
so closely related that I can even consider them the same.  Let me
set the stage first so we are all talking about the same thing.

First, you have a balanced antenna fed with parallel conductor feedline.

Secondly, you are using an isolated single-ended T network as a tuner,
and the output of this tuner is connected to the parallel feedline.

  Facts as I see them so far:
1. The system is balanced completely down to the tuner output terminals.
2. The T network tuner has all its components in one side of the line,
   while the other side of the line has a straight thru wire connection.
3. The above is capable of matching the antenna on most any band.

However, the input side of the tuner must be fed not as a balanced load,
nor as a single-ended load.  The balance point for the input to the tuner
must be somewhere in between.  In other words, the phase relationship
for the voltages measured at the tuner input terminals will not be
180 degrees out of phase.  I don't know what the right angle is for
all conditions, but the 120 degrees that Cecil measured is not out of
line with what I might expect.

Now by virtue of the input of the tuner - not balanced, yet not single
ended - this is the something in the system that will cause the
currents and voltages out of the balun to be other than 180 degrees
out of phase.

Solution as I see it - modify the tuner to be a balanced one, either
with a single ended input, or a balanced input.
OR, isolate the input of the tuner from the transmitter output so the
balance point on the input side is independent of the output side.
Either a 1:1 transformer replacing the balun or (as Roy pointed out)
link coupling will do the deed.

Unless you modify the tuner for balanced input (which may be nasty),
you should remove the balun.  It is likely causing more unbalance
than any other part of the system.  Even a voltage balun or the
bifilar type will not do the job either - only because they want to
control the ground reference.  The antenna is also wanting to
control the ground reference, and the two end up 'fighting each other'.

Hope this makes sense - if not let me know and I'll attempt again.

73,
Don





From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:40 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 4 Oct 1995 02:36:16 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <44srv0$[e-mail]>
References: <44m3l7$[e-mail]> <44mipl$[e-mail]> <44nhj3$[e-mail]> <44oq1o$[e-mail]> <44q190$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail616.nando.net

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

Snip...
 >I have successfully used the gap in plain auto spark plugs - screw them
> >into a grounded plate and attach the feeder wires to the tips - use
> >non-resistor plugs, and adjust the gap for no arcover with your highest
> >power level.
>
> That's an excellent idea and one I haven't heard before.  Do you prefer
> Champion or Autolite?  :)

:-) I like NGK ;-)   Just try to use the kind with no resistor
in the plug - like lawn mower plugs.
>
Snip...
>
> Yeooww!  You've gone from saying that it should work fine in the real
> world, to scrapping the whole idea!  Are you still wearing that
> flame suit?  :)
>
Sorry if I appear to be flip-flopping on you Jack, but there is no
one right answer, - the right answer for you will depend on your
antenna's real center balance point and that is influenced by its
proximity to other things.  I am just trying to present all the
alternatives I can think of, and if you can use one of my suggestions
well and good - just remember, it could be worth about what it cost
you!  We can't all be right all the time.  2 out of 3 is good enough
for myself.  :-)

73,
Don



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Does black dye spoil polyethelene?
Date: 4 Oct 1995 02:44:37 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <44ssel$[e-mail]>
References: <44725m$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail616.nando.net

[e-mail] (Mogollon) wrote:
> snip...
> They use CARBON BLACK to color polyethelene. I think less than 2%.
> Couldn't you just use a megohmeter to measure the dielectric?

You could use an RF megohmeter if you could find one.  The value at
RF will not likely be the same as that measured at DC.

73,
Don W3FPR



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toriod for impedance matching
Date: 4 Oct 1995 05:36:36 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <44t6h4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-03.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>     [e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen) wrote:
  >I have used some time to figure out how to impedance match my
  >beverage, after having read an article in the 1988 edition of
  >Proceedings.
  >
  >Now, the problem is that in Sweden I cannot get hold of the Amidon
  >FT50-43 core mentionen in the article. As I can get hold of other
  >ferritt toroidal cores (primarily Philips) I thought it was a simple
  >matter of using some formulas.

Hermod,

Use a core which is as close as possible to the following:

  Material initial permeability = 950

  Outside diameter = 13mm
  Inside diameter = 7mm
  Thickness = 5mm

If your core is reasonably close to these values, it probably will work.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!sprite39.azstarnet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Mandaville)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need Info on Active VLF Ant Design
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 1995 09:27:06 +0600
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite39.azstarnet.com

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] ('
ALLAN W. BART) wrote:


 Should there be anyone whoo has built antennas for
> the VLF range and has any design ideas or even kits, please let me know

Allan, are you familiar with the Longwave Club of America and their
monthly bulletin called The Lowdown?  This group, of which I'm a member,
often publishes details of active antenna projects for use in the LF and
VLF range.  I don't have my back issues of Lowdown at hand now because of
a household move, but you could contact one of their editors, such as John
Davis ([e-mail]), who could put you in touch with someone who
could provide circuits and construction details.  Good luck.

Jim, KG5KP


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!news.forth.gr!news-ath.forthnet.gr!helios.intranet.gr!demetre
From: [e-mail] (Demetre Koymanakos)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: home made 2 meter beam
Date: 4 Oct 1995 10:32:54 GMT
Organization: Intracom sa, GREECE
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <44tnsm$[e-mail]>
References: <44hqmg$[e-mail]> <44iodo$[e-mail]> <44jtdr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: helios.intranet.gr
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Tom Swisher ([e-mail]) wrote:
: BUDDY10 ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : I think that he was trying to say that he built an antenna HIMSELF that
: : worked better than a store bought one.  He's excited.  That's all.  Calm
: : down.

: : Scott Powell
: : KD6GPV

: I've been a ham for 16 years, building things all the time, and I still
: get excited when it works. There's something magical about building
: something that works all by yourself.

: Also, it's great to see a new ham building things. All this bitching about
: No-Coders being glorified CBers who don't know what it's all about to be a
: ham is ridiculous; I see No-Code hams out there every day building tings
: and upgrading. Guess the doom-sayers were wrong (ha ha).

: More power to you, BRETSKI, and keep building things.

I'm a no code supporter, I HATE CODE !!! I've been building Transmitters
since I was 13 years old, I never buy antennas, I make them all and they
work !!
All I remember of morse is ...---... does this make me a glorified CBer ?
or a bad HAM ???
Morse Code is dead, just like Hercules Display Monitors are for Computers !!

73's



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: Don Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 4 Oct 1995 13:12:44 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <44u18c$[e-mail]>
References: <44q190$[e-mail]> <44t7js$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail908.nando.net

[e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:
>
> >   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> writes:
> >  [e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
> >. . .
>
> I think I detect a communication problem here. There are two
> fundamentally different devices which are commonly referred to as
> "baluns" (at least among amateurs). One, as you say, has a connection
  ...

Roy, Yes there seems to be a communication problem here, and I'm sorry
that I don't really have the words to resolve it.  What I feel is
needed in this particular case is something to isolate the ground
reference from the input of the tuner.  Any form of balun does
not have this characteristic.  Perhaps as you suggested, link
coupling is the best answer, but that is difficult to implement
at the input to a PI or T network using conventional techniques.
Maybe you have some ideas that could work.

73,
Don





From [e-mail] Wed Oct 04 13:34:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Balun Analysis - Part 1 & 2
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 95 16:30:12 GMT
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44s9ud$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

Tom,

I studied your reply in depth, but there's not much I can add.  Every
statement you've made asserts that I'm wrong, says that such-and-such
won't happen, yet there's no logical reasoning presented to disprove my
theory.

You've already agreed with the points made in A through F of my original
analysis.  Why you still insist that the conclusions I've drawn from it
are wrong, I don't know.

It's like I'm looking at an apple, but you're telling me it's an orange.
You're saying it's an orange because if I plant the seeds, they'll grow
orange trees.  If I mash it up, I'll get orange juice.  If I eat it,
I'll get the benefit of its Vitamin C content.  None of this proves it's
an orange though.

If you believe my analysis is wrong, disprove it.  Please don't just tell
me it doesn't happen.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (rui wittwer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 9 Oct 95 04:46:45 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

subscribe



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.math.psu.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!Lehigh.EDU!Lehigh.EDU!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 10Ghz gunn device antenna?
Date: 6 Oct 1995 15:36:36 -0400
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4540g4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ns3-1.cc.lehigh.edu

a few things.
do i need a horn antenna for 10GHz gunn ossc.'s?
and is it posible to EASILY go from waveguide to coax at 10ghz?
or is that only coax to waveguide?

thanks

DAvid
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|         David Roseman       |          [e-mail]       OUTTA ORDER!
|                             |          Saucon Valley Sen. HS   |      |
|      SysOp of NODE 3 BBS    |          The Flying HAm - BBS    |      |
|     Running OBV/2 Software  |          Technomage - BBS        |      |
|                             |          N3SQE/1     - HAm       V      |
|                             |  [e-mail] - Packet  |


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:35 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.iii.net!news
From: "Thomas C. J. Sefranek" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 10Ghz gunn device antenna?
Date: 8 Oct 1995 16:23:17 GMT
Organization: SRC
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <458tu8$[e-mail]>
References: <4540g4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wa1rhp.iii.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

1. Depends on the path expected.

2. Coax to waveguide is usually bi-directional.

Tom




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.databank.com!news.probe.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dale Botkin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m Quad Antenna
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 1995 06:02:12 GMT
Organization: Probe Technology Inc.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <44vshg$[e-mail]>
References: <44r8f2$[e-mail]> <a37cb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup12.probe.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Brad E. Millard) allegedly wrote:

>Joseph Colson III <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>Im looking for plans to a 2m Quad Antenna.  Im interested in building
>>one.  Any information will be greatly appreciated.

>Go to your local public library anfd check out the ARRL Antenna Book,
>if you need to put a hold on it.  Better yet order one from the book
>store.
>       Brad KB7NOQ

Ummm...  look in the current issue of QST.  There's a 2M Quad antenna
construction article there.  Personally, I think it's a TERRIFIC
article, written by one of the true nice guys of our time.  <big
sheepish grin...>

Oddly, I started with the design in the Antenna Book, but when ARRL
Labs tested it, they found a MUCH better element spacing than I or the
Antenna Book had.


Dale - N0XAS




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!rkarlqu
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 75 ohm parallel coax
Date: 6 Oct 1995 22:45:30 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <454bia$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpscrj.scd.hp.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
John Marshall <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Actually, transmission lines work the same way. Two EQUAL LENGTHS of RG11
>cable, each with a characteristic impedance of 75 ohms, are equivalent to
>a single transmission with a characteristic impedance of 37.5 ohms. One
>which weighs twice as much and has twice as much loss as a single
>(matched) length of RG11.

The total loss of the tandem pair is the same as for a single coax
(assuming matched loads).

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:38 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Mark McDermott)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913 coax manufacturer
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 1995 00:20:09 GMT
Organization: Hutton Communications
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <454hk3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44s5o0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sea-ts1-p25.wolfenet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:


>>Is there better 9913 than others ?

Yes there is a superior product to 9913, Times Microwave LMR-400
retains the low loss of 9913 without the disadvantage of 9913. As most
users have found 9913 is very weak when it comes to turns, due to the
semi air dialetric and this translates into impedance bumbs (just as
bad as high VSWR), also this style of dialectric is prone to water
contamination; some will tell you seal it well and this is not a
factor, BS!! Unless you pressurize the cable, moisture will enter the
cable no matter how much tape or any other sealant you apply to the
connectors.
LMR-400 uses the same connectors as 9913.
In short 9913 was a wonderful product 10 years ago, but Times has
surpassed Beldon.
--
Mark S. McDermott, P.E.  N7TJP
email: [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!pcnet.com!news.dfw.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Lee Young)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ???Rohn Tower Question???
Date: 7 Oct 1995 15:06:21 GMT
Organization: DFWNET -- Public Internet access
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <45651d$n88@fnord>
References: <44otfq$[e-mail]> <44v675$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dfw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

In article <44v675$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>>   [e-mail] (JLittrell) writes:
>>     I am trying to put up a Rohn 48' HDBX tower on an Air Force
>>  installation.  The safety people want to know if the tower is "man
rated",
>>  ie... certified safe to climb.  Stupid request, but it's the
government.
>>  Does anyone have this info or a phone number for Rohn?

The Rohm HDBX48 can certainly be climbed by an average size man.
I had my up for more than 8 years, and weighing 200+ I've climbed it
numerous times, at times with another man assisting me perform antenna
installations. I don't have the specs handy on the Rohm BX series of
towers, but seems that the Rohm Co.is located in Peoria, Ill

--
        -------------------------------------------------------------
            Internet: [e-mail]      FidoNet: 1:124/6104
            Amateur Radio: KC5RP          Data/Fax: [phone]

        -------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news00.sunet.se!sunic!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!main03!landisj
From: [e-mail] (Joe Landis - Systems & Network Mgr)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna switch advice needed
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 6 Oct 95 11:22:56 EST
References: <[e-mail]> <44u9rt$[e-mail]>  <4514rh$[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Organization: North American Drager - Telford, PA
Lines: 24

In article <4514rh$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Walter G. Windish ) writes:
> Does anyone have any experience with remote antenna switches?  I have a
> tower I just put up that's a 300 ft cable run from the shack.  The
> tower will have an HF tribander and 6 meter yagi on a rotor.  I'd like
> to use one coax run for both antennas with a remote switch at the
> tower.  I've seen a W2AU "wireless" switch, but it's not rated to 50
> mHz, MFJ has one but I haven't been excited over their quality (to be
> polite).  I'd rather not use a remote switch that requires another 6 or
> 8 condutor cable - to expensive over 300 ft.  Any ideas?
>                         73, Walt  KB2JE

I would look for a surplus Transco switch. I bought 2 of these at a hamfest
once for $10. The kind I have in mind is a 1P4T switch that operates on 28vdc.
It is operated by an internal motor and rotary switch arrangement and requires
no holding current. They are equipped with "N" connectors and are fine up thru
UHF. So you'll be able to add a couple more antennas to your farm. You'll still
need a 5 conductor cable though. I don't see any getting around that, but at
least you could probably get away with cheap TV rotor cable - check the drop
to be sure.

Joe - AA3GN
--
Joe Landis - Systems and Network Manager - North American Drager - Telford, PA
[e-mail]                        ..speaking only for myself, of course..


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Bob Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Antenna/grounding question
Date: 9 Oct 1995 15:51:09 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 63
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <v01510101ac9f38850900@[157.178.121.1]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16390 rec.radio.amateur.misc:92878

My shack is in the closet on the 2nd floor of my 2-story duplex.

I have a nice flat roof upon which I would like to put some antenna's.

There is no conveinent ground within the shack (no cold water pipes etc).

My ideas:

I am thinking of putting an opening in the roof to get from my radio's to
any antenna's that I put on the roof.
I put a ground-rod into the ground.
I have a cable (how big and what type) going from the ground-rod up the
side of my brick duplex, accross the
roof and into my shack, thereby providing a safety ground for the equipment
within my shack.

I will, of course, want the antenna to be groundable when not in use for
lightning protection...

1) Does the above scenerio sound like a good idea?

2) How can I connect the antenna to ground when not in use (have a 2nd wire
going from the ground-rod to the antenna
   but go through some sort of switch on the side of my house to connect
ground so the antenna isn't grounded
    when it's being used)??????

3) What kind of groundrod and cable?

4) How to space the cable from the side of my house and my roof to prevent
any problems should it have to carry
   a large discharge from static/lightning?

5) I have heard something about a code requirement that all ground systems
within a house must be interconnected...
   I don't know how the ground for my electrical system is set-up, but
would I get into code-trouble by even
   installing a ground-rod for my radios/antennas and ignoring the
electrical ground system?

6) Any ideas on how to do this better?

I want to be able to ground my equipment for safety, and I also want any
outdoor antenna's etc. to be
protected from lightning/static discharge and I don't want to be in
some-sort of building code violation.

Thanks for your help...please email any response.

I have only been licensed for just over 2 months, and am trying to get
started safely.

73

-boB

[e-mail]     ####  ####    Bob Brown - KB9LFR
Harper Community College   ##  ##  ##    Systems Programmer
Palatine IL USA            ####  ####    Saved by grace
[phone] - Voice   [phone] - Fax CIS:75552,344





From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Any FM antenna designs?
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 1995 16:28:41 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <45b838$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-tol-oh1-04.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Oct 09  6:29:12 AM PDT 1995
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

The Upside: 30 presets on my new stereo.

The Downside: About six stations worth listening to.

The Potential: LOTS of 'fringe' stations.

The Solution: Better antenna!

But, so far, the "powered" ones at Best Buy don't work as well as my
damned $2.00 dipole piece-o-wire. I have been severly disappointed by
the fact that a thin piece of wire beats the best technology I can get
for under $30.00.

Now, I admit that I have not yet shelled out $60.00 for the best unit
they have, but should I? Has anyone found a home stereo reception
antenna that can both fit inside an apartment AND also actually work?

If anyone could give some suggestions, or plans, or hardcopy or
internet resourcee guides, I would GREATLY appreciate it.

Thanks



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: Any FM antenna designs?
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 17:17:30 GMT
References: <45b838$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 16

[e-mail] wrote:

: Now, I admit that I have not yet shelled out $60.00 for the best unit
: they have, but should I? Has anyone found a home stereo reception
: antenna that can both fit inside an apartment AND also actually work?

Well, yes, I used to know people who hung Yagi antennas cut for the FM
broadcast band from the ceiling in their apartments, and they did work
quite a bit better than the simple wire antenna supplied with the
receiver.  Not as well as if put up outside, but better than nothing.
Of course, not everyone is willing to put up with six or eight feet by 5
feet of antenna hung from the ceiling of their apartment.  I believe in
most areas, FM broadcast stations are included on TV cable; if it's
worth paying for cable service, you might be able to get stations that
way.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.uoregon.edu!calliope.wln.com!news.scn.org!scn.org!bb840
From: [e-mail] (James Aeschliman)
Subject: Re: Any FM antenna designs?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (James Aeschliman)
Organization: Seattle Community Network
References: <45b838$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 21:37:23 GMT
Lines: 24


In a previous article, [e-mail] () says:

>The Upside: 30 presets on my new stereo.
>
>The Downside: About six stations worth listening to.
>
>The Potential: LOTS of 'fringe' stations.
>
>The Solution: Better antenna!
>
>But, so far, the "powered" ones at Best Buy don't work as well as my
>damned $2.00 dipole piece-o-wire. I have been severly disappointed by
>the fact that a thin piece of wire beats the best technology I can get
>for under $30.00.
>
Before trying anything else, try connecting to your TV antenna through a
suitable splitter.  The FM broadcast band is just above channel 6, so a
TV antenna is usually satisfactory.  And any outside antenna will usually
out perform an indoor antenna.

--
Jim Aeschliman                      [e-mail]
Black Diamond, Washington           KD7MK


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!concert!bigblue.oit.unc.edu!gibbs.oit.unc.edu!dbcastle
From: Dale Castle <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Are Austin mobile antennas good?
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 09:15:41 -0400
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gibbs.oit.unc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


        I'm setting up a dual band (2m/440) station in my townhouse
(antenna restrictions). I have the Standard C508A HT and I'm thinking
about getting an Austin 500C mobile antenna to put on my frig in the
kitchen. Is Austin a good name? This radio also requires an SMA
connector. I'm told that SMA to BNC connectors cost about $12. Can they
be purchased cheaper be any mail order company? Thanks. 73s.

dale castle
KD4EAP


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!uw-coco!uw-beaver!cornellcs!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!news.kei.com!simtel!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Gianotti)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Beam Opinion Wanted
Date: 9 Oct 1995 23:27:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45cp79$[e-mail]>
References: <44pqon$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gianotti)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I am looking for opinions on the Hygain Explorer beam (with 40 mtr
element) or any other small or medium sized beam.  The more bands the
better.  How about the Sommner line of beams?

Please reply via E-Mail to:

[e-mail]

as my son uses up all my AOL time.

TNX
John KF9GW
 ___________________________________________________________
| John L. Gianotti KF9GW  --  [e-mail]
 |
| Dir Computer Services    #VOICE:     [phone] ext 260
 |
| Lake Central School Corp.#FAX:       [phone]
      |
|___________________________________________________________|



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:47 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: COAX
Date: 6 Oct 95 13:26:23 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <228A96BB@MHS>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Hey Group.

What is the difference ,other than the name, between
Certified,Consolodated,Wireman,and Belden
Coax?
Is it all made by the same company for certain suppliers or is there a
REAL difference?

73, Roland WF4P


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.rediris.es!gr.cesga.es!news
From: Jose Saa Merino <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft A3 Traps
Date: 10 Oct 1995 08:41:04 GMT
Organization: Dep. Ingenieria Quimica. Univ. Santiago de Compostela
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <45dbj0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jsm
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

 Hola Carlos, soy Luis desde el PC de un compa±ero. Te envφo esto por si te
interesa.
73'
Luis EB1AKI




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!olivea!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft AP8A
Date: 9 Oct 1995 04:40:16 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <45a93g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs2-30.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]

I've had on up for 5 years with only a few radials and have
enjoyed good results on all bands (albeit a might narrow on
80). I'm sure more radials would help a great deal, but the SWR
is below 1.5:1 for the CW part of all bands. The mechanics are
good and it has held up great with three "fishing line" guys.

I will buy another when this one gives up the ghost.

73

Joe - KW1K

P.S. I lost my assembly directions and called the guys at
Cushcraft and they are really great to work with - I had a
manual in an hour by FAX.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newshub.cts.com!crash!digcir!ej.johnson
From: [e-mail] (Ej Johnson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Euphoria Tape...Try it wi
Date: Fri,  6 Oct 1995 00:51:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: The Digital Circus BBS [phone]
Distribution: world
Lines: 78

ES<>Path: crash!newshub.cts.com!usc!news.cerf.net!news-relay.eworld.com!news.sp
ES<>From: [e-mail]
ES<>Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
ES<>Subject: Euphoria Tape...Try it with a Lover!
ES<>Date: 4 Oct 1995 14:15:52 GMT
ES<>Organization: Internet Direct, Inc.
ES<>Lines: 54
ES<>Message-ID: <44u4uo$[e-mail]>
ES<>NNTP-Posting-Host: bud.indirect.com
ES<>Originator: [e-mail]

ES<>I.C.P., Suite 578-101, 5360 E. Bay Dr., Clwr., FL 34624

ES<>The Euphoria Tape

ES<>Do The Euphoria Tape alone the first time, and then
ES<>with a lover. It's a phenomenon you will feel within
ES<>the first 3 minutes of use -- what you feel the rest of
ES<>the time is unbelievable.

ES<>The Euphoria Tape.

ES<>It was first whispered about on college campuses, and
ES<>only experimented with in seclusion, or among close
ES<>friends in private settings, but it has now become a
ES<>cult rush and is considered the next passion of our
ES<>Cyber lifestyles.

ES<>The Euphoria Tape.

ES<>Not a drug, not a chemical, but an audio stimulation of
ES<>brain centers controlling pleasure. And agony. And ecstacy.
ES<>The buzz. An audio mesmer signal strokes the base of the
ES<>mind, choking out pain sensations and producing the violent
ES<>flow of... euphoria.

ES<>The Euphoria Tape.

ES<>Copies have changed hands from friends to friends to other
ES<>friends. It is not regulated, there are no laws yet restricting
ES<>use of The Euphoria Tape.

ES<>The Euphoria Tape is rushing the masses.
ES<>*************************************************
ES<>Stereo audio cassette. Scientific treatment included.

ES<>Shipped immediately upon receipt of $11.88
ES<>personal check or money order.
ES<>Absolute satisfaction guaranteed (and
ES<>experienced) or full purchase price refunded.

ES<>Offered only to adults 18 years or older.

ES<>*******************
ES<>IntraNet Cyber Products
ES<>Suite 578-101
ES<>5360 E. Bay Dr.
ES<>Clearwater, FL 34624
ES<>*******************

ES<>Tape Duplication prohibited.
ES<>$2.00 for Scientific Treatment.

ES<>Copyright 1995 Intranet Cyber Products, All Rights Reserved.
ES<>-------------------------------------------------------








WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH HAM RADIO???

[e-mail]

 * OLX 2.1 TD * All wiyht.  Rho sritched mg kegtops awound?


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:51 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: EZNEC/ELNEC News
Date: 6 Oct 1995 21:56:00 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <4548lg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-30.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

EZNEC/ELNEC News  October 6, 1995

Microsoft has developed a patch to fix the compiler bug which causes
difficulty running EZNEC under Windows 95 and Windows NT. See information
on WINFIX32 below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've established an ftp space from which anyone can download files.
There are currently two files available:

ELNECDEM.EXE    A demo version of ELNEC which can be freely copied and
                distributed. Because EZNEC operation is nearly identical,
                this will also give you a good idea of how EZNEC operates.
                After downloading the file, type ELNECDEM and the file will
                expand into several. See the READ.ME file which is created.
                The new files also include some information about EZNEC.

WIN32FIX.EXE    This is a Microsoft patch which will fix EZNEC so it will
                run as an ordinary DOS application under Windows 95 and
                Windows NT. After downloading, type WIN32FIX and it will
                expand into two files. See the READ.ME file which is created
                for instructions.


These files are available via anonymous ftp from
ftp.teleport.com/vendors/w7el.

Both .EXE files are self-extracting ZIP files which are expanded
by typing the file name.

If you're not familiar with anonymous ftp operation, here's the
procedure. (It's assumed that you have the software to do an ftp
transfer.)

With your software, choose 'ftp.teleport.com' as the host, 'anonymous'
as the login name or I.D., and your email address as the password.

From here the procedure will vary depending on your software. Change
directories to 'vendors', then 'w7el'. You should see the files and be
able to copy them to your computer. The READ.ME file contains short
descriptions of the available files.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I know that someone is maintaining a collection of .EZ files. Rather
than trying to use my ftp space for this, I'd rather put a notice
in my ftp space telling where to find the .EZ files which are
currently being archived. Please let me know where they are.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: feeding antenna w/ foam coax---sealing the feeline
Date: 6 Oct 1995 17:51:20 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4548co$[e-mail]>
References: <453gjq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <453gjq$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob Tomas)
writes:

>
>I have a butternut vertical and I am feeding it directly with foam
>dielectric coaxial cable.  I would appreciate suggestions for
>some sort of stuff to seal the end of the feedline so that water doesn't
>get in.  Preferably, something available at the local hardware store,
>rather than the not so local ham store.
>
>
>bob
>
>

Bob, I hate to seal coax, cause if it leaks just the tiniest little bit
you seal the water and condensation IN. I use a boot or hood of rubber
(like from an old innertube) to protect the connction like an umbrella,
open at the bottom. And then I loop the cable up to prevent andy water
that does get in from flowing through the whole cable and ruining it.

Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: feeding antenna w/ foam coax---sealing the feeline
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 95 22:19:53 GMT
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <453gjq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Bob Tomas) wrote:
>I have a butternut vertical and I am feeding it directly with foam
>dielectric coaxial cable.  I would appreciate suggestions for
>some sort of stuff to seal the end of the feedline so that water doesn't
>get in.

When I was in the offshore industry, we used one of two methods depending
on the exact application.

For coax connections outside, exposed to rain, salt air, salt spray, etc.,
we would assemble the cable, smear silicone glue over the outside, then use
heatshrink tubing over that.  As the tubing shrinks, it squeezes out the
air and leaves the silicone to fill the gaps.  I once saw one of these
joints disassembled after about three years in service.  Everything around
the cable was shot - stainless steel hardware, aluminum, etc., all corroded
by the salt.  Even the outer jacket of the coax looked rough.  Inside the
joint though, it looked like it had just been assembled the day before.

The other technique we used was the black, tar-like stuff also used by CATV
installers. It's not as weatherproof as the previous method, but it allows
disassembling the connection much more easily.  A similar substance is
available from Radio Shack, although I haven't tried their brand.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:55 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: feeding antenna w/ foam coax---sealing the feeline
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <453gjq$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 13:44:17 GMT
Lines: 22

The only thing I've found at the local hardware store is called
"Liquid Electrical Tape". It comes in a small metal can with a screw on
lid and attached brush. I used some on my coax and it seemed to do ok. It
takes several coats to fill in the seams. The only problem is that over
time, it dries out and cracks when exposed to the weather. Therefore,
just order some coax-seal from your friendly ham store. It works better
and last longer. Also, consider forming a drip loop so water wont run
down the coax. In other words, make the end of the feed line point down
so it can drain and not leach down into the cable.


Bob Tomas ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I have a butternut vertical and I am feeding it directly with foam
: dielectric coaxial cable.  I would appreciate suggestions for
: some sort of stuff to seal the end of the feedline so that water doesn't
: get in.  Preferably, something available at the local hardware store,
: rather than the not so local ham store.


: bob
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!primenet
From: [e-mail] (John S. Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FERIITE COAX?
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 95 04:43:03 GMT
Organization: Department of Redundancy Dept.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <4550e5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44mk5j$[e-mail]> <44ouka$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip200.msp.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

><snip in consideration of bandwidth>
>
>Oh, so that's how you get the toroids.  You go into the ferrites cage
>in the morning and sweep them off the newspaper on the bottom of the
>cage.  By adjusting the feed mix can you get toroids with different
>characteristics?  Do I want to know how you get the rods?
>
This is not technically correct. Ferrites get toroids from
sitting on hard, cold cage floors. :)
John

Warning! Trespassers will be SHOT! Survivors will be SHOT again!


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:57 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FERIITE COAX?
Date: 7 Oct 1995 20:19:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4575du$[e-mail]>
References: <4550e5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4550e5$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John S.
Hill) writes:

>This is not technically correct. Ferrites get toroids from
>sitting on hard, cold cage floors. :)
>John

John, Your misconception stems from mispronouncing toroids. It is
TWO-ROYDS.

So toroids are like hemroids, only from hard stools (hard too too). To get
a red mix you feed them ground glass.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:58 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 95 17:40:49 GMT
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44vs3d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Hi Tom, just wanted to add a couple things to my previous post.

I think you're having problems agreeing with me because you're
visualizing the balun as a device that can choke off high voltages
presented to its output terminals, while simultaneously delivering the
power of the transmitter to the load.  You see _two_types_of_voltage_
on the balun's output terminals.

In fact, there is only one type of voltage on each terminal - an RF
sinewave that we are measuring with respect to ground, and which is the
result of the power applied to the balun by the transmitter.

I *did* read your last post very carefully, and I can tell you that I
found several contradictions.  It wasn't productive to point them out,
because the basic error was in your first few statements.  Nevertheless,
I believe the contradictions result from an attempt to reconcile your
instinctual comcept of a choke with the true operation of the balun.

Yes, there is a choking action from the input to the output of the balun,
but there is no external source of high voltage being applied to the
output.  Until this concept of an external application of high voltage is
divorced from the fact that the balun's only power source is the
transmitter, it will be impossible to visualize what's really happening
in this circuit.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:19:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 08:06:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 58
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45364k$[e-mail]>
References: <452jd9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jack,

In article <452jd9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(WB3U) writes:

>
>Tom, are you bailing out on me?  <g>  Honostly, given that we've just
>arrived at the crux of the disagreement, this seems like a
>particularly inopportune time to quit.
>

Well this really has just gone in needless circles. I arrived at the "crux
of the disagreement" in my very first post! That's why I'll just keep
saying the same things over and over again. Watch......

>Roy has not addressed this issue of the output phase of the balun.
>He was presented with a balun unattached to anything else and I don't
>believe his very general response can be unconditionally applied to
>this situation.

Baluns work the way they work. His and my statements agreed on the rules
they follow, and the balun follows these rules in ANY application. It's
simply HOW the component called a choke balun functions!

Current baluns can have **"ANY"** common mode voltage from end to end the
load supplies or causes in the circuit. Well designed current baluns
always source equal and 180 degree out of phase currents to the load. The
common mode voltage can be any phase at the balun, and that phase doesn't
affect a thing in the operation of the balun. So why drag phase into this?
Its much too early for that when the basic principles of the balun,
antenna, and feedline are still being confused.

>  That's especially true given the conditions we've
>placed on the balun - just saying that the transmitter must see 1:1
>makes all the difference in the world.

Not really. The terminal to terminal impedance means next to nothing to a
choke balun. The parallel (common mode) impedance of the system is the
main design consideration.

>If you really want to leave, I'll take this time to thank you for your
>input and your *considerable* participation in this thread.  Despite
>the fact we've disagreed, you've made me think about all this in
>greater depth than I ever would have otherwise.  You have also raised
>a number of questions regarding the questionable benefits of the
>balun/tuner combination, part of which involved spending your own time
>performing tests parallel to Cecil's.

No one should even had to have made a "test". It's pretty simple circuit
theory. If one winding of the balun still connects between one end of the
antenna feedline and chassis, the choking voltage across the balun remains
exactly the same on each winding. So moving the balun to the input side of
an unbalanced tuner makes absolutely no change in the impedance
requirements of the balun.The only improvement is in transmission line
mode voltages of the balun. See, I just keep repeating the same things!
Why? Because that's how the circuit works!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:00 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 95 15:14:37 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 39
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <453hfc$[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <452693$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

> Current baluns can have **"ANY"** common mode voltage from end to
>end the load supplies or causes in the circuit.

First, doesn't common mode mean that the RF is in phase on both sides
of the transmission line?

Second, what mechanism exists in the load that's going to cause this
high, in-phase voltage you're referring to?  High feedpoint impedance
creates high *differential* voltage.

>So why drag phase into this?

My analysis says that these high voltages won't exist across the balun
because the voltages on the line are 180 degs out of phase.  If that's
true, the voltage from end to end can't increase without also
increasing the voltage across the output.  That would change the
impedance seen by the balun, which would then be reflected back to the
transmitter.  The SWR meter would no longer measure 1:1.

On the other hand, you've said this won't happen because the high
end-to-end voltages you're referring to are in-phase across the line.
The choking voltage across the balun will be high and the transmitter
will still see 1:1.

Incidentally, Roy's answer only agrees with you insofar as such an
in-phase voltage *could be applied* without interfering with the
balun's fuinction.  His reply did not say such a voltage *will be
created* by this circuit or load.  That's a crucial difference.

So, now we're not going in circles anymore.  This is a new phase of
the disagreement (pun intended) and it provides a different
perspective on the issue than we've discussed previously.  Like I
said, I hope you'll stick around.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:01 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 16:18:54 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <453kte$[e-mail]>
References: <4514em$[e-mail]> <451c1k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <451c1k$[e-mail]>,
W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:

CM>>; and a 4:1 current balun
CM>>;  (MFJ-912).

>Red mix core, choke type 1:1

I took the MFJ-912 apart last night. Its two cores are not separate and the
coax center conductor input ties directly to one of the balanced outputs. It
appears to be a voltage balun. If so, that would explain things.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 13:33:42 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 75
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <453p9m$[e-mail]>
References: <453hfc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


>   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>> Current baluns can have **"ANY"** common mode voltage from end to
>>end the load supplies or causes in the circuit.

Jack wrote:
>First, doesn't common mode mean that the RF is in phase on both sides
>of the transmission line?
>

The common mode current and voltage is the in-phase component of the RF.

>Second, what mechanism exists in the load that's going to cause this
>high, in-phase voltage you're referring to?

The antenna and it's self impedance, plus transmission line effects.

>High feedpoint impedance creates high *differential* voltage.

Of course, in MANY cases. But it sure doesn't stop there! Let me give you
an example of an antenna system that will produce high common mode voltage
with a low differential impedance, it's kind of a rare antenna (not). It's
a dipole fed with a coaxial or balanced 50 to 75 ohm ohm line around 1/4
wl long. The differential impedance is low, but the common mode voltage
and impedance is high. If you don't believe that try to excite the end of
the feedline against ground!

Another example is a dipole with the feedline paralleling the antenna and
leaving the antenna at the end. The transmission line impedance and
voltage is low, the common mode voltage and impedance is very high. There
are literally *dozens* of examples. Some of these examples require high
choking mode impedances in the balun to insure balance, others allow use
of transmission line effects to eliminate or reduce the need for a balun.
Each case needs to be individually reviewed.

>
>>So why drag phase into this?
>
>My analysis says that these high voltages won't exist across the balun
>because the voltages on the line are 180 degs out of phase.  If that's
>true, the voltage from end to end can't increase without also
>increasing the voltage across the output.

Yes, but that's NOT true for common mode voltages. They are in phase.

> That would change the impedance seen by the balun, which would then be
reflected >back to the transmitter.  The SWR meter would no longer measure
1:1.
>
>On the other hand, you've said this won't happen because the high
>end-to-end voltages you're referring to are in-phase across the line.
>The choking voltage across the balun will be high and the transmitter
>will still see 1:1.
>
>Incidentally, Roy's answer only agrees with you insofar as such an
>in-phase voltage *could be applied* without interfering with the
>balun's fuinction.  His reply did not say such a voltage *will be
>created* by this circuit or load.  That's a crucial difference.
>

Pardon me for being blunt, but my patience is becoming exhausted. I'm sure
Roy understands antennas very well, so I have no doubt he will agree that
such a voltage not only can be created, but that it often is. There were
several issues I mentioned many posts ago that needed resolved. Perhaps
Roy would be willing to try to do that with you. They were:

1.) How an antenna works and how it appears to the rest of the circuit.
2.) How a balun works and how it appears to the rest of the circuit.
3.) How a transmission line works.
4.) How a tuner works.

If the basics aren't understood, this thing will keep flying off on
tangents that produce incorrect conclusions .

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 18:01:24 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <453qtk$[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <452693$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <452693$[e-mail]>,
W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:

>And if Cecil wants to make measurements
>again, I would like to lend him a good balun or two, hi.

I took W2FMI's word that the $60 Amidon HBHT200 is a good balun. How 'bout
describing a "good" balun in enough detail that we can duplicate it.

thanks and 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 21:41:43 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 29
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4547qn$[e-mail]>
References: <4514em$[e-mail]> <451c1k$[e-mail]> <452jge$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <452jge$[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Let me know if you want some quick and easy numbers on any of this,

Thanks Jack, what I want is a solution when I am not sure what the problem is.

My feedline impedance can be anything reasonable with naturally unbalanced
currents. Is it possible to balance the currents without changing the antenna
system? Assuming I can look at the amplitude and phase of the currents, what
can I put between the transmitter and the ladder-line that will give me an SWR
of 1:1 at the transmitter *AND* balance my ladder-line currents. I suspect that
a balanced transmatch would give an SWR of 1:1 but the ladder-line currents
would still be unbalanced.

If I do succeed in balancing my ladder-line currents, will the currents still
be balanced at the unbalanced antenna? Just how much engineering needs to be
done on the antenna itself to balance the currents? Can one end of an antenna
be trimmed to achieve a closer balance?

What does a 50 ohm to 200 ohm balun do with a 1000-j1000 ohm load? Can it be
analyzed as if it were a quarter-wave 100ohm series section transformer? Would
a current balun ahead of a balanced transmatch equalize the currents?

Why aren't things as simple as they were in 1957 when I talked all over the
world on 10m using an 80m dipole fed with cheap coax? The more I learn, the
worst my antennas perform. :-)

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 22:11:02 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4549hm$[e-mail]>
References: <451t62$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-30.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>  [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:
>  >
>  > What does it mean when the ladder-line currents are the same magnitude but
>  > not 180 degrees phase difference? Parallel currents?
>  >

Yes. You have parallel currents (non-zero common-mode current)
whenever the currents on the two lines are other than equal in
magnitude and opposite in phase.

Assume that the current in one wire, I1 = 1 /_ 0 degrees and
the other, I2 = 1 /_ 160 degrees = -0.94 + j0.34.

The common-mode current is 1/2 (I1 + I2) = 0.17 /_ 80 degrees.
The differential-mode current is 1/2 (I1 - I2) = 0.98 /_ 9.9 degrees.

The differential-mode current doesn't radiate. The feedline is
radiating as though there were currents of 0.17 amps on each wire
which are in phase with each other. You can scale this result to
any other assumed value of I1.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 22:13:27 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <4549m7$[e-mail]>
References: <451thg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-30.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

;   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> writes:
;  [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:
;   >
;   > You're correct, Jack. The current on the outside of the inner conductor of a
;   > coax cable creates a field. The current on the inside of the outer conductor
;   > creates a field. If these fields are anything but equal and opposite, their
;   > sum is non-zero and the coax would have to radiate. It can't radiate because
;   > a field can't penetrate the shield. Therefore, the currents have to be equal
;   > and opposite. If this argument sounds circular, you can also approach the
;   > situation by observing that all the field from the inner conductor couples to
;   > the inside of the outer conductor, again since the field can't penetrate the
;   > shield. This total field coupling induces an equal and opposite current on the
;   > inside of the shield. I've just said the same thing as you did, with slightly
;   > different words.
;   >
;  But, but, but ... as I recall, the currents Cecil measured were 120
;  degrees out of phase.  There has to be a rational explaination, but
;  I can't come up with one right now.  Something in this whole system
;  is not responding to the expected.  If you have any educated guesses,
;  I for one would like to hear them, because I have just about run
;  out of plausable guesses.
;
;  73,
;  Don

I haven't had the time to follow the discussion with the required detail. But
I'd like to know how the @#!! Cecil managed to measure the current on the inside
of the coax shield. That ain't easy!

Roy



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:08 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ferrite beads to
Date: 6 Oct 1995 22:23:09 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <454a8d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-30.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

There are an awful lot of words flying around over a simple
concept. When impedances get large and real baluns, with real
impedance limitations, are analyzed, a lot of value judgement
goes into deciding how to trade things off. And that's perhaps
worthy of many words (and many have indeed been said). But most
of the discussion here seems to involve the operation of theoretically
perfect baluns.

They're simple.

There are two rules, as I pointed out before: (For a 1:1 current
balun) the voltages across the windings must be equal. The currents
through them must be equal and opposite. (You can extend these rules
to any ideal transformer by requiring that the winding voltages are
related by the same ratio as the number of turns, and the total
amp-turns through all windings must equal zero.)

May I humbly suggest that you write the simple equations which are
involved, put in some numbers, and look the results?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:08 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 95 00:13:53 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <454a8d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

Hi Roy,

>There are two rules, as I pointed out before: (For a 1:1 current
>balun) the voltages across the windings must be equal. The currents
>through them must be equal and opposite.

Although it was a ferrite bead balun, I used similar (same?) rules to draw
my conclusions.  The voltage across the output must be the same as the
voltage applied to the input, and currents at the output must be equal and
opposite.

BTW, have you had a chance to look at my analysis to see if you agree with
the conclusions?  The dust hasn't settled yet.  <g>

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:10 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 7 Oct 1995 02:34:46 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <454p06$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44vanj$[e-mail]> <450v31$[e-mail]> <451t62$[e-mail]> <453kc2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1205.nando.net

[e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:
    snip...
> I want my antenna to run N10W. Without putting a pole in my front yard, I
> cannot come off at right angles with the feed line. So my transmitter is
> at about 45 degrees to the center of the antenna instead of the optimum 90
> degrees. One end is closer to trees and a 5 ft. metal fence than the other
> end.
>
> I experimented with a couple of coils in the ladder-line last night. I could
> get the current amplitudes equal but their phase difference was 160 degrees.
>
> Given this natural imbalance existing in my antenna system, will a current
> balun really force it into balance? Can I trim one end of my antenna to
> improve the balance? What happens when a current balun is feeding a balanced
> system and one of the ladder-line wires breaks at the antenna?

Cecil, I would now guess (with about a 90% confidence level) that your
parallel currents are from the antenna coupling back onto your feedline.
Since this is going to happen unless you can change your feedline position
so it is physically balanced WRT the antenna, I believe it is something
you will have to live with.

You WILL have balance in the currents that are causing your signal to
squirt off your antenna, and if all is well in that department, why do
anything more.  If it were my situation, I would feed that combination
with a balanced tuner and be done with it.  I would try it both with and
without a grounded connection on the balanced output side, and use
the one that gives the least RF in the shack.  The balanced tuner
should not respond to common mode, so the parallel currents just end
at the tuner (They will in fact see a very high impedance load. so they
will try to find a better path).

If you want to also use a balanced input to the tuner (more knobs to
fiddle with), you could also use a balun at the input.  My preference i
is for link coupling from the input to the output side of the tuner.
It gives low loss, and I find I can have more control over the tuning
without worrying if most of the signal is going into the antenna or
into the tuner.  Tuning a T network for low loss is tricky - I find a
PI-net somewhat better in that respect, but I seldom miss with a
simple balanced tuned tank circuit - either parallel tuned or series
tuned as required.

Good luck es 73,
Don



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sundog.tiac.net!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 7 Oct 1995 05:43:53 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45542p$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <450v31$[e-mail]> <451t62$[e-mail]> <453kc2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <453kc2$[e-mail]>,
Cecil A. Moore -FT-~ <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I experimented with a couple of coils in the ladder-line last night. I could
>get the current amplitudes equal but their phase difference was 160 degrees.

Well, my face is red. I drug out my scope manual and guess what? My 100MHz
scope will do lissajous figures only up to 3MHz. I know, I know - RTFM.
Please forget the phase information I posted. My currents are unequal and
somewhat out of phase but I used the wrong instrument to look at them.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:13 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 7 Oct 1995 02:15:48 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 88
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4555uk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Jack asked for several examples of antennas that could present more common
mode voltage than the differential feedpoint voltage. I wrote:
>
>>Let me give you an example of an antenna system that will produce high
>>common mode voltage with a low differential impedance,

Then after giving the examples asked for, Jack said:
>
>    << snip >>
>
>Tom, that's not even remotely related to your original statement.  You
>said the choking voltage would be the same whether the balun was at the
>input to the tuner or the output.

Jack, the voltage will be. I don't understand how the conclusion was
reached that giving antenna examples changes my previous statements! If
any given system is fed with the choke balun ahead of the tuner, and the
same balun is then moved after the tuner, the choking voltage would be the
same whether the balun was at the input to the tuner or the output.

>You specifically attributed it to high impedance across the feedline,
i.e. high >*differential* feedpoint impedance.  Not once did you say "if
high parallel >currents/voltages are present".

Sorry Jack, I keep saying it could be *anything* in the general sense.

At one time we were talking about specific balanced and unbalanced loads
and antennas, and ignoring feedline lengths and/or coupling to the
antenna. In those cases, the common mode voltage was directly related to
the feedpoint voltage. In some of those cases the differential voltage and
parallel voltage could even be equal. It depends on the particular load,
and the particular unbalance we are dealing with.

But if any given system is fed with the choke balun ahead of the tuner,
and the same balun is then moved after the tuner, the choking voltage
would be the same whether the balun was at the input to the tuner or the
output.

>If you're now saying that high differential voltages on the feedline
>won't adversly affect the balun when it's at the input to the tuner,
>then we're in agreement.

No, actually what I'm saying is this. If any given system is fed with the
choke balun ahead of the tuner, and the same balun is then moved after the
tuner, the choking voltage would be the same whether the balun was at the
input to the tuner or the output.

>However, that would mean that you have to either unconditionally agree
with my >entire analysis, or find a culprit other than common mode
voltages to dispute it.

The main area I disagree with is the position of the choke balun. Perhaps
I didn't make my position clear. If any given system is fed with the choke
balun ahead of the tuner, and the same balun is then moved after the
tuner, the choking voltage would be the same whether the balun was at the
input to the tuner or the output.
>
>All of this aside, we're not driving the feedpoint against ground, we're
>driving it differentially.  If the balun sinks those parallel voltages to

>ground, who cares?  Maybe the feedline won't radiate so badly.  You know,

>no one ever said the balun could compensate for every antenna flaw you
can
>think of.

Oh, so now "who cares"? I thought we were talking about whether moving the
balun reduces the choking requirement needed! That's why I said: If any
given system is fed with the choke balun ahead of the tuner, and the same
balun is then moved after the tuner, the choking voltage would be the same
whether the balun was at the input to the tuner or the output.

> We were talking about a specific characteristic of the signals
>and the effect that characteristic (differential feedpoint impedance)
>would exert on the balun.
>
>>Pardon me for being blunt,
>     << snip >>
>>Perhaps Roy would be willing to try to do that with you. They were:
>>
>>1.) How an antenna works and how it appears to the rest of the circuit.
>>2.) How a balun works and how it appears to the rest of the circuit.
>>3.) How a transmission line works.
>>4.) How a tuner works.
>
>Yep, that's pretty blunt.  Guess my credibility just hit an all-time low.

>Exce


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:14 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 7 Oct 1995 03:50:33 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 42
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <455bg9$[e-mail]>
References: <454mqf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <454mqf$[e-mail]>, DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
writes:

>
>All else aside, I do see one reason for putting the balun on the input
side
>of the tuner, and that is to allow the balun to operate into the
impedance
>that it was designed for.  That alone should keep its parameters in line.
>
>The BIG difference I see here, is that the balun is not feeding a
>balanced load, and as you stated, the tuner elements in one side of
>the line unbalances it somewhat - assuming that the antenna and feedline
>were balanced to start with.
>
>73,
>Don

Hi Don,

This has gotten way too long and far too complicated for such a simple
topic.

Moving the balun to the input reduces the common mode impedance stresses
in the balun, but it doesn't change the choking requirements one bit, or
reduce the common mode voltages that produce core heating and core
saturation.

It's really pretty basic when you look at the circuit. One side of the
balun still connects to the antenna or feedline. Since both windings must
have equal common mode voltages, the end to end voltage of the balun
remains the same.

If the balun has an arcing problem from winding to winding, or a current
carrying problem in the wire or cable, moving the balun will likely help
that problem. But that usually isn't the problem area.

The problem area is almost always core saturation or heating, or
insufficent common mode impedance to be a good choke. Moving the balun
won't help those problems one bit.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 95 08:13:23 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <455d5p$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4555uk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

Hi Tom,

>Jack asked for several examples of antennas that could present more
>common mode voltage than the differential feedpoint voltage. I wrote:

While I don't agree with everything in this post, I am certainly
convinced that the choking voltage you've been referring to is not the
same choking voltage I've been defending the balun against.  Given
that fact, I think we've been debating this from two different, but
equally valid, perspectives.  I'm going to follow your lead and bow
out of this particular aspect of the discussion at this point.

I'm still interested in pursuing the current balance capabilities of
the balun/tuner combination, so I'll post additional test results as
soon as I pick up a few more parts and fabricate the toroidal pickups.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 7 Oct 1995 01:57:35 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <454mqf$[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <452693$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1205.nando.net

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>    snip...
> Cecil can re-post the phase measurements and tests he made. I'm hazy as to
> what Cecil's exact test setup was and what effect this could have on the
     More snips ...

I also am hazy now on just who measured what.

>
> Anyway, my only interest was the implication moving a choke balun to the
> input of an unbalanced matching network improves balun action by reducing
> the choking mode voltage presented to the balun. That's an easy question
> to answer without all this data clutter.

All else aside, I do see one reason for putting the balun on the input side
of the tuner, and that is to allow the balun to operate into the impedance
that it was designed for.  That alone should keep its parameters in line.

The BIG difference I see here, is that the balun is not feeding a
balanced load, and as you stated, the tuner elements in one side of
the line unbalances it somewhat - assuming that the antenna and feedline
were balanced to start with.

73,
Don



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 7 Oct 1995 16:29:12 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4569so$[e-mail]>
References: <451thg$[e-mail]> <4549m7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <4549m7$[e-mail]>,
Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I haven't had the time to follow the discussion with the required detail.
>But I'd like to know how the @#!! Cecil managed to measure the current on
>the inside of the coax shield. That ain't easy!

Hi Roy, the 120 degree measurements were *voltages*, not currents.
There was approximately 20v from each choke output to system ground
and also between the two choke outputs. Any current measurements
were made using toroid pickups on the ladder-line.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:19 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 95 18:35:26 GMT
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4514em$[e-mail]> <451c1k$[e-mail]> <452jge$[e-mail]> <4547qn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:

Hi Cecil,

> . . . what I want is a solution when I am not sure what the problem is.

I'm not sure I can define the problem either, but I can relate the basic
procedure I use to design baluns.  What follows is the information I
mentioned in an earlier post.

First, let's assume you've decided that you want a 1:4 isolation xfmr for
80M - 10M.  The transformer will be trifilar wound with 12 or 14 gauge
wire.  The secondary will consist of two of the windings wired in series
and there is no direct connection from primary to secondary.  Let's also
say that you believe the load impedance could be as high as perhaps 600
ohms, which translates to 150 ohms at the input.

The two rules I start with in designing the transformer are A) the XL of
the windings must be at least 4 times the impedance of the circuit they're
connected across at the lowest frequency of operation, and B) don't use
more than 12 turns.

I limit the number of turns because of concerns over excess capacitance
between the windings, and this also affects the maximum number of cores
that can be used.  As more cores are stacked, the total length of the
windings increases, also increasing the capacitance.  In general, I think
that stacking more than 3 of the FT-240 size cores probably invites
trouble.  The desirable aspects of stacking the cores are, of course,
increased power handling and increased XL.  Each additional core
contributes the same amount of XL per turn as the first one.  Two cores
will have twice the XL, three cores will have three times the XL etc.

Finally, in order to keep losses to a minimun, I try to use the lowest
permeability available that will get the job done (minimum required XL).

So, with the preceding in mind, I bring up my spreadsheet that already has
the characteristics of several types of cores listed and which will perform
the AL to XL calculations automatically .  I'm going to start with
FT-240-67 cores (u=40) just to see if they'll work in this application.

Starting with 8 turns, I enter 16 turns in the spreadsheet because the two
secondary windings are in series.  Given the anticipated load of 600 ohms,
we need a minimum of 2,400 ohms XL.  Sixteen turns on the core at 3.5 Mhz
yields an XL of 298 ohms, so we're not even close.  Even if we multiply by
three (multiple cores), it comes up short.  Increasing the number of turns
to 12 (24 total secondary) yields 2,013 for three cores, which still
doesn't meet the minimum requirement of 2,400 ohms.

Moving on to a FT-240-61 core (u=125), an eight turn winding (sixteen
secondary) yields 974 ohms XL for the secondary at 3.5 MHz, which is also
insufficient. However, stacking three cores yields 2,922, which meets our
requirements.  Looking at the primary, we need at least 600 ohms XL to
accomodate the circuit impedance of 150 ohms.  Eight turns on the three
cores yeilds 729 ohms, so we're OK.  Actually, it's probably redundant to
check both the primary and secondary due to the mathematical relationship
between the turns ratio and XL.  I do this mostly out of habit.

I also checked this design at 160M, but with 12 turns.  That would provide
an XL of 3,381 ohms at the secondary and 846 ohms at the primary on 1.8 MHz
using three cores.  FWIW, 10 turns yielded nmumbers almost exactly on the
minimum requirements.  I prefer to see somewhat more than provided for by
the "4X" rule when possible though.  Anyway, by adding turns, we can cover
160M to 10M with three of these cores.

The combinations are almost endless, and I should mention that the above
transformer required greater than usual XL because it was designed to see
600 ohms, rather than 200 ohms.  Regardless of the exact combination of
core and windings though, all involve a compromise between core loss,
inter-winding capacitance and minimum required XL.

That's all there is to it, at least for the basics.  As I mentioned
previously, I do worry about impedance skewing and frequency response
anomalies with these broadband transformers.  Anyone who has the test
equipment should check the impedance transformation and power loss on all
the bands of interest (and with various load impedances) before assuming
the design is functioning properly.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:20 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 95 08:20:03 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 30
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <455di9$[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <452693$[e-mail]> <454mqf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:

Hi Don,

>The BIG difference I see here, is that the balun is not feeding a
>balanced load, and as you stated, the tuner elements in one side of
>the line unbalances it somewhat - assuming that the antenna and
>feedline were balanced to start with.

The key word here is "somewhat".  If the degree of balance reported by
W2OBJ can be achieved, it might still be an acceptable solution.

Tom has got me worried about parallel voltages though.  According to
my original analysis (and my preliminary tests), this tuner places
non-symmetrical voltages on the feedline.  In my tests, the ratio was
between 28:1 and 23:1 on the three bands I checked.

That means there's a significant parallel voltage, which in turn
means that Tom's perspective of choking voltage comes into play here
(i.e., the parallel voltage will be applied across the balun's
choking mechanism).

What I'm wondering now is whether this can be alleviated by moving the
choked shield of the coaxial balun to the input of the tuned
components, and the center conductor to the feedline?  Won't common
mode voltage be attenuated by the tuner before it reaches the balun?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:21 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 7 Oct 1995 20:19:00 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4575dk$[e-mail]>
References: <455di9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <455di9$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>What I'm wondering now is whether this can be alleviated by moving the
>choked shield of the coaxial balun to the input of the tuned
>components, and the center conductor to the feedline?  Won't common
>mode voltage be attenuated by the tuner before it reaches the balun?
>
>73,
>
>Jack  WB3U

Hi Jack,

Nope, it's the same thing all over again. Remember the rules of the balun:

a------]]]]]]]]]]-------c
b------]]]]]]]]]]--------d

a to c must = b to d voltage differential
a to b must = c to d voltage differential

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:22 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 8 Oct 1995 19:21:47 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 42
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4598cb$[e-mail]>
References: <453qtk$[e-mail]> <4545q9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <4545q9$[e-mail]>,
W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I called MFJ and asked what type of balun was used in the box you have,
>and I was told it is a current balun. Apparently not though, hi. Anyway, I
>hope the cores were red powdered iron like they said?

Yup, the cores are red but the MFJ-912 seems to be a 4:1 voltage balun
wound with discrete wires, i.e. no constant characteristic impedance.
Before I bought it MFJ told me it was a current balun and that's why I
bought it. It is certainly a lousey current balun.

>I think Sevik's articles were real good, but he tends to use too low a
>permeability.
>I think Maxwell's application of higher perm materials is much better in
>low or medium power applications,

Sevick says that higher perm materials mean higher losses and lower
perm materials mean lower losses so loss is his hot button. Just from
trying to understand these threads, it seems a losing battle to try
to design a balun when one doesn't know what the load impedance really
is. I personally have tried 77 type material and measured considerable
losses in beaded chokes into highly reactive loads.

>For a coaxial
>to feed an antenna I use an air wound choke or 77 material.

In addition to the loss in 77 material, my transmatch will not
load my antenna when using a 1:1 balun either before or after
the transmatch. I seem to need at least a 4:1 balun to be able
to load it with my MFJ-949.

On the higher bands and sometimes on the lower bands, I can position a
stub per band on the ladder-line that will bring the impedance seen by
the balun to a resistive 300 ohms. In one of Sevick's articles, he
says that a 50-200 ohm balun may not work well in a 75-300 ohm
application. He says baluns are *NOT* transformers. Tom, could you
tell us why a 50-200 ohm balun has problems with a 300 ohm load?
Does it have the same problem that a 50-200 ohm quarter-wave
transformer would have with 300 ohms?

Thanks and 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:25 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 95 22:32:30 GMT
Lines: 126
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <452693$[e-mail]> <454mqf$[e-mail]> <455di9$[e-mail]> <456tbf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Hello all, following are the test results from my tuner.  When reviewing
the numbers, please be sure to consider the notes that follow the chart.
Also, the preliminary results from the other day are **null and void**.
I discovered a defective piece of coax in my test setup.  Once that was
replaced, the pattern of the measurements agreed more closely with those
made earlier by Tom and Cecil.

 TX OUT------Coax Center------Pi-Network------Balanced Feeder
 TX GND-----Choked Shield---------^-----------Balanced Feeder

        Shield  PI      E p-p   E rms   Z       Pwr     Phase
INPUT   0       40      40      14.14   50      3.99    n/a
80M a   58      104     phase   phase   phase   3.99    45 degs (tuner)
80M b   55      125     phase   phase   phase   3.99    About 150 (feeder)
75M     110     150     260     91.9    2113    3.99    Near 180 degs
40M     52      88      140     49.5    613     3.99    180 degs
20M     58      110     168     59.4    882     3.99    Near 180 degs
15M     40      104     144     50.9    648     3.99    Near 180 degs

**** NOTES ABOUT THE CHART ****

1.)  Except for the row labeled "INPUT", "Shield" refers to the feedline
wire connected to the shield output of the balun; "PI" refers to the
feedline wire connected to the pi-network.  The "INPUT" row uses these
columns to show the voltage applied to the input of the balun.

2.)  The "Phase" column indicates the approximate phase difference between
the two signals at the output terminals of the tuner.

3.)  Except at the input to the balun, "Z" was calculated using the known
power input and the total differential voltage across the output terminals
of the tuner.

4.)  Where "phase" is present rather than a numeric entry, calculations
were not made because the phase of the signals is considered too far
from 180 degrees for meaningful results.

5.)  The balun/tuner combination will not match my feeder/antenna below
approximately 3.7 MHz without "help".  Measurements shown in rows labeled
"80M a" and "80M b" include an external variable capacitor set to
approximately 150 pf, in series with the pi-network output terminal.

6.)  "80M a" measurements were taken directly at the tuner's output
terminals.  "80M b" measurements were taken at the choked shield and the
"far" side of the external series capacitor.

**** NOTES REGARDING THE RESULTS ****

An attempt was made to measure the voltage directly at the output of the
balun, but voltages *everywhere* changed considerably when a probe was
attached to either terminal.  This was particularly true of the terminal
feeding the pi network.  As a result, I decided that readings between
those points would not generally be useful.

One of the oddities to these measurements concerns this same effect.
Although voltages changed by 20-50% by attaching scope probes to various
points, the SWR at the transmitter was never perceptibly affected.  This
was true even when the probe was attached to the pi-network output. My
initial guess was that a considerable portion of the voltage on each
terminal must be common mode rather than differential.

This assumption does not agree with one measurement made directly at the
output of the balun though. Although I didn't report this measurement in
the chart for the reasons stated above, the sum of those voltages was not
too far off from the voltage applied to the input of the balun.  I measured
22V P-P on the choked shield and 52V P-P on the center conductor.  Given
that the phase difference was approximately 135 degs, I think the total
voltage is is at least reasonably similar to the 40V P-P input.

Incidentally, this was conducted on 40M.  The reason the 22V measured at
the balun doesn't agree with the "Shield" measurement in the 40M row
of the chart is that everything changes when the probes are attached to
the balun.  With one probe on the shield, attaching the other probe to
the other side of the balun, VS the output of the PI, made a considerable
difference in the voltage seen on the shield.

Before I draw what few conclusions I believe to be valid at this point,
note that the voltage on the choked shield is highest on 75M.  On 80M,
the numbers don't look quite as high, but this is deceiving.  Considering
the increased phase shift on 80M, parallel voltage on the balun may be much
higher than the numbers indicate.  Anyway, I don't think it's conincidence
that I have noticeable RF in the shack on 75/80M.

Also, I'm not sure I understand the mechanism that's producing these high
parallel voltages, if indeed that's what they are.  I would have thought
that common mode would equal the difference in voltage from one line to
the other, or would be represented by significant phase shift.  Despite the
fact that voltages on 75M are higher overall, the "difference" voltage was
not significantly different than other bands, nor was phase shift.

My only conclusions at this point are:

A.)  Moving the balun to the input of the tuner reduces it's susceptibility
to high load impedances in the differential mode, but high voltages can
still exist from each of the balun's output terminals to ground.

B.)  There is detectable RF in the shack here on 75/80M.  If I assume
that this is the result of high parallel voltage (?) on the balun causing
current to flow across the choked shield to ground, then it follows that
feedline currents are not balanced on that band.

C.)  This arrangement (balun at the input of the tuner) will allow feeding
higher impedances than would otherwise be possible with a particular balun.
However, the balun is still not entirely out of harm's way and feedpoint
impedances must still be kept reasonable.

As a final note on all this, I want to reiterate the fact that my tuner
originally used an isolation transformer.  The 80M symptoms were much
worse with that particular device, and there is no doubt it offered less
choking action than the 150 beads on the coaxial balun used for these
tests.  The windings were sufficient for operation into a 50 ohm load
on 80M though (I went back and double-checked).  My point is, I do not
believe the high voltage seen on 80M is the result of the imbalance to
ground caused by the coax balun per se.  Unfortunately, I never measured
the output of the tuner with the isolation transformer installed, but I
suspect it also caused unequal voltages to be applied to the line.
Whether this is equivalent to saying that this characteristic of the
balun/tuner arrangement is the cause of parallel voltages, I'm not sure.

These tests leave a number of unanswered questions, but I need to cut
this short for now.  As always, comments are welcome.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:26 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 95 22:42:47 GMT
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <453qtk$[e-mail]> <4545q9$[e-mail]> <4598cb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:

Hi Cecil,

>Sevick says that higher perm materials mean higher losses and lower
>perm materials mean lower losses so loss is his hot button. Just from
>trying to understand these threads, it seems a losing battle to try
>to design a balun when one doesn't know what the load impedance really
>is. I personally have tried 77 type material and measured considerable
>losses in beaded chokes into highly reactive loads.

No offense to Mr. Sevick, but that's like sayijng that filling your gas
tank with water will let the engine will run cooler.  It's certainly
true, as far as it goes.

BTW, neither red iron nor 77 are suitable materials for 80-10M toroidal
baluns in my opinion.  There are a number of low loss, high permeability
mixes between these two extremes.

You're right, it isn't possible to design a balun without knowing the
anticipated input/optput impedance.  Then again, that applies to
practically any device intended for use at RF, right?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:27 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!one.mind.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 95 00:49:17 GMT
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <452693$[e-mail]> <454mqf$[e-mail]> <455di9$[e-mail]> <456tbf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Speaking of measurements, I would like to see what happens if you
>swap the feedline wires at the output of your tuner,  Could you do that
>and report the voltages in both cases.  I would expect that the same
>voltage will be read at each tuner output terminal, no matter which
>way the feedline is attached, showing that the antenna and feedline
>assembly is electrically balanced.  I expect it to be close if not
>right on.  This is based on my assumption that the controlling
>'ground' point in an antenna system is the electrical center of the
>antenna.  Since you have an ideal case to test this, I would like
>to see if that is correct,  If not correct, I will have to take back
>a lot of what I previously said!

Don, I did this on 40M as part of the recent tests, but I didn't mention
this particular characteristic in the post that has the test results.
The difference when I reversed the feedline was so slight, it was too
insignificant to even bother noting the change.

Honostly, I was surprised by this.  The height of my antenna to ground
is reasonably identical at each end and the feedline comes off at almost
90 degs.  However, one leg is in the clear, while the other runs through
a very thick stand of trees for its entire 100' length.

Anyway, you won't need to take anything back on account of my antenna. <g>

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.eecs.umich.edu!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 9 Oct 1995 01:11:35 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <459ss7$[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <455di9$[e-mail]> <456tbf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>A.)  Moving the balun to the input of the tuner reduces it's susceptibility
>to high load impedances in the differential mode, but high voltages can
>still exist from each of the balun's output terminals to ground.

I tried an experiment today with my normal setup which is a transmatch
with chassis grounded feeding a 4:1 Amidon HBHT200 voltage balun into
the 300 ohm ladder-line. With this normal configuration the ladder-line
currents are 30% unbalanced.

I tried keeping the same configuration but putting a choke balun between
the xmtr and the transmatch and floating the transmatch chassis. The
latter-line currents improved to 20% unbalanced.

I'm ready to build me a balanced 'T' transmatch. What does everybody
think about using my Amidon balun between the xmtr and the balanced
transmatch?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!psuvax1!news.math.psu.edu!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 95 04:54:45 GMT
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <455di9$[e-mail]> <456tbf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <459ss7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:

>I'm ready to build me a balanced 'T' transmatch. What does everybody
>think about using my Amidon balun between the xmtr and the balanced
>transmatch?

Cecil, my test results indicate that much more is happening here than
just the differential voltage created by the balun.  Tom seems to
believe (correct me if I'm misquoting) that the higher voltages being
measured on these baluns are the result of parallel voltages generated by
the balun/tuner/feeder/antenna as a whole.  Worse, I think it's Tom's
opinion that the components in a "ground based" tuner do practically
nothing to mitigate these parallel voltages.

If this is correct, then it won't matter whether you use a single-ended T
transmatch or a balanced T transmatch.  The parallel voltages will still
appear on the output terminals of the balun.

Tom sent e-mail to me recently which I'm still studying.  In one part
of his message, there's mention of the need to use a totally floating,
link-coupled tuner, fed from the transmitter by a current balun.

Maybe he'll do us a favor and describe this design a little more fully
here on the group.  Incidentally, you asked awhile back what I thought of
the balanced Z-match in the Antenna Compendium.  While I like the design,
the complication puts a project like that out of my reach right now.

You know, despite Tom's advice on the tuner, I'm leary of link coupled
tuners.  The Matchboxes (both power levels) tested in that QST article
earlier this year showed losses that I consider excessive.  Fear of excess
loss is one of the main reasons I've stuck with the concept of a toroidal
balun feeding a T or PI network.  If it now turns out that this approach
doesn't unconditionally provide the relief from high impedance that I've
assumed, I may go back to resonant antennas fed with coax.

BTW, I gather from past articles that you don't consider a 3 dB tuner
loss significant.  If so, the link coupler may be your best solution.
In my case, such losses would mean dissipating 400-500 watts in the tuner
itself when I turn on the amplifier.  IMO, that's unacceptable.

I don't know if you have the QST article I'm referring to, but if not,
I'd be glad to post or e-mail the numbers.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:31 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 9 Oct 1995 09:08:20 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 69
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45b6s4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>Subject:       Re: Ferrite beads to
>From:  [e-mail] (WB3U)
>Date:  Sun, 08 Oct 95 22:32:30 GMT
>
>Hello all, following are the test results from my tuner.  When reviewing
>the numbers, please be sure to consider the notes that follow the chart.

>Also, the preliminary results from the other day are **null and void**.
>I discovered a defective piece of coax in my test setup.  Once that was
>replaced, the pattern of the measurements agreed more closely with those
>made earlier by Tom and Cecil.
>
> TX OUT------Coax Center------Pi-Network------Balanced Feeder
> TX GND-----Choked Shield---------^-----------Balanced Feeder
>

<<<<<SNIP>>>>>>>

>My only conclusions at this point are:
>A.)  Moving the balun to the input of the tuner reduces it's
susceptibility
>to high load impedances in the differential mode, but high voltages can
>still exist from each of the balun's output terminals to ground.

Gosh, where have I heard that??? <BIG grimace slowly turning into a grin)>

>B.)  There is detectable RF in the shack here on 75/80M.  If I assume
>that this is the result of high parallel voltage (?) on the balun causing

>current to flow across the choked shield to ground, then it follows that
>feedline currents are not balanced on that band.
>

Right, because the balun impedance requirements ARE NOT REDUCED BY PLACING
THE BALUN AT THE INPUT OF THE TUNER!!!!!!!!! Now the neatest thing, this
can ALSO be true with a balanced tuner after tyhe balun!!!!!

>C.)  This arrangement (balun at the input of the tuner) will allow
feeding
>higher impedances than would otherwise be possible with a particular
balun.
>However, the balun is still not entirely out of harm's way and feedpoint
>impedances must still be kept reasonable.
>

No, the parallel (common mode) voltages must be kept low, they are NOT
necessarily related to the feedpoint impedance!

>These tests leave a number of unanswered questions, but I need to cut
>this short for now.  As always, comments are welcome.
>
OK. Here they are. ANY phase measurement you make will be meaningless for
now, that's why I tried to get you out of that mode. When we all finally
agree the balun follows certain rules, and we all understand what the
antenna and feedline REALLY looks like electrically, that will become very
clear. The length of the feedline, the type of antenna, the type of tuner
and the particular settings used, all move the phase around wildly! Trying
to analyze what's happening with the real world circuit before the basics
are fully understood will fry your brain!

And BTW, link coupled tuners are just as efficient as any other type. The
circuit configuration has little to do with efficiency, but that's the
ninth topic in this thread. Why can't we stick to ONE THING AT A TIME?
This stuff bounces off the walls!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 9 Oct 1995 15:01:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45brhl$[e-mail]>
References: <45bhie$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45bhie$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:>
>
>>Tom sent e-mail to me recently which I'm still studying.  In one part
>>of his message, there's mention of the need to use a totally floating,
>>link-coupled tuner, fed from the transmitter by a current balun.
>
>The Z-match link-coupled tuner described in CQ has a fixed link of 5
>turns. Seems to me that wouldn't be enough on the lower bands. Do air-
>core transformers handle reactance better than toroids?

The number of turns on the link controls the loaded Q and losses in the
tuner. I use three taps on my link coupled tuner, and try to use the
lowest turns ratio possible between the link and the resonant winding.
That insures maximum power handling and lowest losses. Certainly the same
link is not good from 1.8 through 30 MHz, it changes with the impedance
ratio as well as frequency.

>>BTW, I gather from past articles that you don't consider a 3 dB tuner
>>loss significant.
>
>I think I said that a 3dB total loss would be acceptable to me. Say, 1dB
>in the tuner, 1dB in the balun, and 1dB in the transmission line. I waded
>into a pile-up last night on 20m competing with beams and KW's and got
>a 5x9 report from Hawaii running 100w on my 2XZepp.
>
Tuner loss is a self limiting problem at QRO Cecil. If the loss is too
high, the tuner disappears! ;-)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 9 Oct 1995 17:17:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45c3i6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>OK, let's say I build a symmetrical, balanced Pi-network transmatch and
>I drive it with a current balun.  Further, let's say that my antenna is
>symmetrical and is well-balanced with respect to ground, but its
feedpoint
>impedance is 2,000 ohms.  Under these conditions, will parallel voltages
>be present, and if so, what's the mechanism that creates them?
>
>        << snip >>

Hi Jack,

It would be nice to agree on what the antenna really looks like first!
That would help explain some common ways the common mode voltage can
exceed the differential voltage at the feedline connection point.

Consider a half wave long antenna like this one:

 0-----------a b------------0

This dipole antenna has a resonant impedance of 30 ohms or so for each
half, so each side looks like a pretty stiff load. Even if it floats in
space, each side still looks like a 30 ohm impedance, so the reference has
nothing to do with "ground images" and all that stuff.

If we eliminated the "b" side and replaced it with a small pie pan, the
impedance would be the series impedance of the pie pan plus the 30 ohms or
so element impedance. Because the pan Z would be so high (for an HF
dipole), the feedpoint impedance would be pretty high. If the pie pan was
a radial 1/4 wl sheet, the impedance difference would be around 30 ohms.
So each half is a low Z referenced against any other different electrical
mass we provide, grounded or not (there usually is a modification if the
reference mass is mutually coupled to the element).

If fed with a voltage source, and if we tied another 30 ohm impedance wire
to a feedpoint terminal (let's say terminal "a"), the current will divide
equally between a and the new wire, and the current in b would go up
slightly because the net feedpoint impedance would now be 45 ohms instead
of 60.

Does this all make sense?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 10 Oct 1995 00:42:20 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <45cfhc$[e-mail]>
References: <451tst$[e-mail]> <452693$[e-mail]> <454mqf$[e-mail]> <455di9$[e-mail]> <456tbf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1407.nando.net

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
> Snip...
> Don, I did this on 40M as part of the recent tests, but I didn't mention
> this particular characteristic in the post that has the test results.
> The difference when I reversed the feedline was so slight, it was too
> insignificant to even bother noting the change.
>
> Honostly, I was surprised by this.  The height of my antenna to ground
> is reasonably identical at each end and the feedline comes off at almost
> 90 degs.  However, one leg is in the clear, while the other runs through
> a very thick stand of trees for its entire 100' length.
>
Jack, I'm glad to hear that the voltage kdid not change when you reversed
the feedline.  That is what I expected, and to my mind reinforces the
concept that the controlling 'ground' is the zero voltage reference
point established by the antenna.

More importantly, I can conclude that any unbalance in your system
is created by the tuner/balun combination.

Next step that I would like information on is - what are the voltage
readings at the balun/tuner junction, and further, if you reverse the
balun output terminals, what happens to the voltage readings.

If you keep the same voltage reference point as you used when you
measured the tuner output voltages, I think we may develop a better
picture of what is going on.

Tnx es 73,
Don



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:35 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 10 Oct 1995 04:40:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 48
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45dbht$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>
[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>>
>>a------]]]]]]]]]]-------c
>>b------]]]]]]]]]]--------d
>>
>>a to c must = b to d voltage differential
>>a to b must = c to d voltage differential

<slice (sorry OJ), I mean snip>

>Let's assume the above balun is a choked-shield coaxial balun instead of
>the bifilar choke/transformer.

OK Jack, but it makes no difference at all. They work exactly the same way
and still follow the same rules.

>Let's also assume we input 30V P-P.  Now,
>let's connect a 12.5 ohm load resistor from "c" to ground, and a 37.5 ohm

>load resistor from "d" to ground.
>
>Under these conditions, according to Reflections, the voltage from "c" to

>ground will be 10V, and the voltage from "d" to ground will be 20V.  This

>means that the voltage across a:c will be 20V (30V minus 10V), and the
>b:d voltage will be 10V (0V minus 10V).

Oh no, that can not be! The balun would catch fire! Put polarities on the
balun, and you will see why:

+ a-----]]]]]]]]-------c+
 - b-----]]]]]]]]-------d-
In your example:
Now a to c is 20v with the more negative end towards c.
Now b to d is 20v with the more negative end towards d.

So "a" (+30) has an out of phase voltage to c, subtracting the voltage for
a net of + ten volts. And b has 0 (our ground reference) with -20 to d for
a net b to d voltage of -20.

The difference from c (+10) to d (-20) is....thirty! So "a" to b= c to d
(correct phase), and b to d is equal to "a" to c with correct phase!

Follow that?


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to "float" transmatch
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 95 18:11:10 GMT
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <44s548$[e-mail]> <45123f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Tom Sefranek, WA1RHP, has very generously sent a couple of scope probes
to allow me to test my balun/tuner.  My time was very limited today, but
I did run a few preliminary tests.  The results are much different than
those previous reported, and somewhat confusing.

I'm working under a few handicaps, which I'll describe briefly:

First, I don't have 300 - 1,000 ohm load resistors yet, so these tests
were performed with the existing antenna/feedline.  I used very low
power, monitored each frequency carefully before conducting the test,
and ID'd as required.

Second, my Bird wattmeter has been in storage for six years and this is
the first time I've tried to use it.  It has chosen this moment to die
(no meter indications).  I tried several slugs to no avail, so the
problem is in the metering circuit.  :(

Third, I can't measure current until I build a pair of toroidal pickups.

Finally, due to time limitations, I did not open the tuner to measure
voltages at the input/output of the balun itself.  With luck, I'll have
a chance to do that within the next few days.

At any rate, because I didn't open the tuner and have no way to know what
the voltage at the input was, I made no attempt to make absolute voltage
measurements.  The following measurements are in scope divisions rather
than volts.  Again, this is only preliminary and I don't think any
conclusions should be drawn yet.

TX HOT ----- Center Conductor ----- Pi-network ----- Feedline Wire A
TX GND -----  Choked Shield ------------------------ Feedline Wire B

                     40M           20M           15M
Feedline Wire A      1 DIV         1 DIV         1 DIV
Feedline Wire B     28 DIV        23 DIV        24 DIV
Phase              180 degs     Both about 10 degs off 180

Note that power out was readjusted on each band, so 1 DIV on 40M is not
the same as, say, 1 DIV on 15M.

What's odd is that measurements previously made by Tom and Cecil seemed to
corroborate by analysis of the circuit, i.e., voltage on the feedline wire
connected directly to the shield should stay low, while the other rises to
equal the total voltage across the line.  Ironically, the tests I
performed seem to dispute that, at least on a preliminary basis.  The
results only make sense if the feedline is presenting a *lower* impendance
than 50 ohms, but I have difficulty with the idea that this is occuring on
all three of the bands tested.  At any rate, opening the tuner for the
next round of tests should help to resolve this.

There are two other differences worth mentioning.  SWR at the transmitter
did not change significantly when the probes were attached on any of the
frequencies tested.  If the SWR changed, it was by less than 0.1:1.

Also, the phase between the two voltages on either side of the feedline
changed *very little* when the tuner was mistuned.  Moving the SWR around
between 1:1 and about 5:1 seemed to caused a shift of only a few degrees
(it was barely perceptible on the scope).  Only when SWR was well above
5:1 did I see a larger shift.  This shift appeared to approach 20 or 30
degrees, but only when the reflected reading was *very near* the infinity
mark.  Based on the position of the meter, I would guess the SWR at the
transmitter was well over 10:1 at that point.

I don't know why these results are so different than Tom and Cecil saw.
Maybe it's because my tuner uses a Pi-network, or because the balun and
tuned components are inside the case.  At any rate, there is obviously
something *very* different about the equipment being used for these tests.

Again, I don't think it's wise to draw any conclusions at this point.  I'm
presenting this strictly as a "progress report", and as food for thought.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:38 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.scott.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to "float" transmatch
Date: 7 Oct 1995 02:42:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4557hi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

The last message I posted in reply to Jack didn't delete from my mailer. I
hope it was blank because I didn't intend to post it, but I fear not.

Please ignore it, I am well beyond my frustration limits..

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried the  DISCONE in 73 MAG ??
Date: 9 Oct 1995 09:09:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45b6tl$[e-mail]>
References: <459jl9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <459jl9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(DedElvis01) writes:

>
>I read the article and was wondering if anyone has gotten it to work. I
am
>in the 10 meter band and need a small antenna for dx work, when possible.
>If anyone has any advice on a discone, please reply.
>
>

Someone posted some stuff here a month ago about it. Like most 73
Articles(?)  it didn't work. Perhaps he will show back up.

73


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news00.sunet.se!sunic!uunet!in2.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hello
Date: 6 Oct 95 16:38:24 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Hi Don,

Bet you're working too much.... :-)

I made a few calls near the appropriate frequency last night.

I notice that, as conditions are improving, there seems to be
a bit more traffic out there.  I'll usually try to fit somewhere
close and give a call if things are busy.

Hope you are off today - probably look for you around 8 if you're
there.

73 - wally



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lamarck.sura.net!news.uky.edu!ukcc.uky.edu!WALLY
From: [e-mail] (Walter R Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help with 448MHz beam construction..
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 95 16:35:30 EDT
Organization: The University of Kentucky
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ukcc.uky.edu

I am going to build a small (4 or 5 element) 440 beam and I think I have
everything okay except I am unsure what length to make the gamma matching
section..  I borrowed an ARRL Antenna book from a friend, but unfortunately
it's not big on 440 due to it being from '55.. :)

Also, probably will be constructed from 1/8" tubing, possibly PVC boom..

448.5 centre freq.
Driven El. length (ft) 475/MHz 1' .71"
Director lenth ft) 455/MHz     1' .17"
Reflector (ft) 500/MHz         1' 1.38"

Driven El. to Reflector .2l,      5.27"
Driven El. to First Director .2l  5.27"
Fir. Director to Second      .25l 6.58"

This is, of course, 4 element...  And I understand this is going to be
around 30Ohm impedance..

Suggestions on gamma match dimentions, or alterations to above
dimentions would be highly appreciated!

Thank you.

---
     Walter    _                                              Alinco 580
       R    _ //  [e-mail]     [e-mail]
    Francis ¢X/   [e-mail]  [e-mail]       KE4UWN


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP! SWR at Antenna or Transmitter?
Date: 6 Oct 1995 13:40:23 -0700
Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712,714-638-4133,805-294-9338)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44tbaa$[e-mail]> <44uuks$[e-mail]> <44v5ub$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com

In article <44v5ub$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (John R. Cunliffe) wrote:
> .... the mismatch is only
> corrected between the matching device and the tranceiver.
> The cable/antenna is still mismached. This can be problematic
> if there are high circulating currents (heating) or high voltages
> (arcing) present.  Also the whole line tents to radiate and screws up
> the F/B ratio of directional antennas it also can cause a lot of
> TVI/RFI.
>

I am still learning about antenna and feed line.  I have a question on
the above statement.  How does feed line/antenna mismatch causes a lot
of TVI/RFI?

Thanks for any answer.

73,

---
Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.eznet.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John R. Cunliffe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP! SWR at Antenna or Transmitter?
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 1995 01:30:48 GMT
Organization: E-Znet Inc. Rochester N.Y. 14623 (716)-262-2485
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <454li0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44tbaa$[e-mail]> <44uuks$[e-mail]> <44v5ub$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-7.eznet.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Alfred Lee) wrote:

>In article <44v5ub$[e-mail]>,
>[e-mail] (John R. Cunliffe) wrote:
>> .... the mismatch is only
>> corrected between the matching device and the tranceiver.
>> The cable/antenna is still mismached. This can be problematic
>> if there are high circulating currents (heating) or high voltages
>> (arcing) present.  Also the whole line tents to radiate and screws up
>> the F/B ratio of directional antennas it also can cause a lot of
>> TVI/RFI.
>>

>I am still learning about antenna and feed line.  I have a question on
>the above statement.  How does feed line/antenna mismatch causes a lot
>of TVI/RFI?
Well, there are two reasons that I am aware of but there might be
more.
First because of the mismatch, part of the power will be reflected
back from the antenna towart the tuner on the outside of shielded line
this can cause unwanted radiation into nearby objects like
powerlines,telephone cable and so on.This is especialy true for
coaxcable feed's.
Unfortunately most TV , radio receivers and telephones do not like
this very much :-)
Second sometimes if the antenna tuner is in a high pass configuration
(and quite a few comercial available tuners are just that)
it can happen, that this perticular radiation of the cable enhances
radiation of harmonics because there could be just the "perfect match"
for this harmonic frequenzy. A well matched antenna  acts as a
nice"harmonic filter" by presenting a high impedance to the signal on
harmonic frequency's.This effect diminishes if the cable radiates.

John
>Thanks for any answer.

>73,

>---
>Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
>KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'

   John R. Cunliffe   N2NEP
   [e-mail]
   fax# [phone]
   http://home.eznet.net/~cunliffe/



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP! SWR at Antenna or Transmitter?
Date: 7 Oct 1995 21:19:26 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <456qsu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx01-04.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Alfred Lee) writes:
>  In article <44v5ub$[e-mail]>,
>  [e-mail] (John R. Cunliffe) wrote:

>  > .... the mismatch is only
>  > corrected between the matching device and the tranceiver.
>  > The cable/antenna is still mismached. This can be problematic
>  > if there are high circulating currents (heating) or high voltages
>  > (arcing) present.  Also the whole line tents to radiate and screws up
>  > the F/B ratio of directional antennas it also can cause a lot of
>  > TVI/RFI.
>  >

>  I am still learning about antenna and feed line.  I have a question on
>  the above statement.  How does feed line/antenna mismatch causes a lot
>  of TVI/RFI?

Feedline radiation can cause TVI/RFI because a feedline typically is
physically closer to power lines and other ways of coupling into
electronic equipment than the antenna is. Also, the current on the
feedline can flow via the rig onto a house's ground system, again
providing a good mechanism for coupling into TV's, VCR's, etc.

But mismatching a line doesn't cause feedline radiation. It's caused
by situations which induce current flow on the outside of a coax
feedline or which cause unbalanced currents to flow in a symmetrical
feedline. This can be caused by connecting a coax line directly to
antennas like dipoles, or by routing the feedline in a manner that's
not symmetrical with respect to the antenna.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!sysop
From: [e-mail] (BigMike)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help-Marine Base Antenna
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 1995 08:03:01 GMT
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <45809p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftmfl2-2.gate.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82


   I need help in selecting an antenna, for base purposes, for
the VHF Marine Frequencies.  I prefer some type of ground plane and
have been told that 2 meter antennas work good.  Is this really true
and if so, which one ?

   Thanks in Advance,

    Mike



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!mack.rt66.com!dragon.asctmd.com!rmccoy
From: [e-mail] (Russ McCoy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: home made 2 meter beam
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 1995 07:57:25
Organization: AMTECH Systems Corporation (EVAL)
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44hc6k$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dragon.asctmd.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Agreed!


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:46 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.oz.net!news.alt.net!news.net99.net!news!md
From: [e-mail] (Mike Denton)
Subject: How to Get Free Cable Premium TV .. LEGIT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: GoodNet
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 12:18:01 GMT
Lines: 33

      First I want to say I am sorry that this has nothing
to do with the topic of this group. You may see this
message in other newsgroups, the reason is I am subscribed
to those too so please don't flame me. I have been posting
and reading to this group for a while. I just wanted to
let you people out know there is a way to get Cable TV for
FREE. I recieve this letter in the mail from a friend
that had told me it works. I gave this to one of my friends
and he had free cable in his house within 20 mins. I have not
tried this method yet but may soon try if my cable goes up in
price. If anyone would like a copy send the following to the
address below.

Address Envelope to:

FreeStuff
9393 N. 90th St.
Suite 102-289
Scottsdale, AZ  85258

Enclose in the envelope:

Send...

    $1.00 U.S MONEY    *** NO COINS *** NO CHECKS ***
 inside a sheet of carbon paper or construction paper,
 and send a *self-addressed*,*stamped* envelope to the
 address above.


Thanxs,
Just think if you pay 30$ + a month. 1$ will save
you 359 + dollars a year.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:47 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ssi.syspac.com!dnorris.syspac.com!dnorris
From: [e-mail] (Dean Norris)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: HyTower problems
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 16:33:49 LOCAL
Organization: Systems Solutions Inc.
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dnorris.syspac.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16351 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:20252

I have a HyTower antenna which is tuning off freq...  E.g.

40M   6700 kHz
20M  13500
15M  20600
10M  27800


Any Ideas as to why it would be tuning gennerally long on all bands?

TIA


deaNO


           s/Dean Norris,
     Amateur Radio Station K7NO
[e-mail] or [e-mail]
           Phlogiston IS!


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:48 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou2!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: HyTower problems
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou2.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 20:54:55 GMT
Lines: 16
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16373 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:20289

Dean Norris ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I have a HyTower antenna which is tuning off freq...  E.g.

: 40M   6700 kHz
: 20M  13500
: 15M  20600
: 10M  27800


: Any Ideas as to why it would be tuning gennerally long on all bands?

Possibly it has taken root an grown. Look near the top for shiney metal
shoots

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!redstone.interpath.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Luke Hamaty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J antenna
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 1995 08:30:17 GMT
Organization: Interpath -- Providing Internet access to North Carolina
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <455ab2$[e-mail]>
References: <446m3h$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44qhm7$[e-mail]> <44ucc4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kq4oq.pdial.interpath.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (James W. KELLEY) wrote:

>Most of the commercially available verticals now are stacked 5/8ths wave
>arrangements.  I'm thinking that my next copper pipe project should
>be a 5/8 over 5/8 Super J.  Now this *should* be a gain antenna.

>Question:  Should the phasing stub be 1/4 wave between 5/8ths elements?

>73
>Jim
>KE6JPO

I built one once - in fact I still have it in storage. It worked very
well when I had it mounted on my chimney, although there was a
starling that though I had put the phasing stub out as a perch.

I set it up so the feedpoints of the two sections are separated by a
free-space 5/8 wave (there is a bit of a gap at the phasing stub). I
think I used a 3/8 stub so that the two sections are in phase.


                        73 de KQ4OQ





From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!woodhill.demon.co.uk
From: [e-mail] (Bob Carter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: jota !help!!!! - jott.txt (1/1)
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 1995 16:29:59 GMT
Organization: Woodhill Creativity
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: woodhill.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: woodhill.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

begin 644 jott.txt
M#0H-"@T*"4-A;B!A;GEO;F4@<&QE87-E(&AE;'`@;64_#0H-"@E/;B!T:&4@
M=V5E:V5N9"!O9B!/8W1O8F5R(#(Q<W0@=&AE(%-C;W5T(&UO=F5M96YT(&ES
M(&EN=F]L=F5D(`EI;B!T:&4@2F%M8F]R964@3VX@5&AE($%I<B`H2D]402DN
M(%=E(&%T('1H92!0:&]E;FEX(%9E;G1U<F4)"55N:70@*$ME;G1O;B`F($MI
M;F=S8G5R>2!$:7-T<FEC="D@:&%D(&%R<F%N9V5D(&9O<B!A(&QI8V5N8V5D
M(`ER861I;R!O<&5R871E<B!A;B!A(&9E=R!O9B!H:7,@8V]L;&5G=65S('1O
M('5S92!O=7(@56YI="!$96X@87,@"6$@8F%S92!F;W(@82!R861I;R!S=&%T
M:6]N+B!792!H879E(&UA9&4@86QL('1H92!A<G)A;F=E;65N=',@"69O<B!M
M87-T<R!A;F0@=VER97,@=&\@8F4@<W1R=6YG(&9O<B!A97)I86QS('1E;&5P
M:&]N92!L:6YE<R`)971C+B!B=70@:&4@:&%S(&IU<W0@8F5E;B!G:79E;B!T
M:&4@8V]M<&QE=&EO;B!D871E(&9O<B!M;W9I;F<@"6AO=7-E(&%N9"!I="!I
M<R!T:&%T('=E96ME;F0L('1H97)E9F]R92!W92!A<F4@=VET:&]U="!A(`EL
M:6-E;F-E9"!O<&5R871O<BX@27,@=&AE<F4@86YY8F]D>2!O<B!A(')A9&EO
M(&=R;W5P('1H870@=V]U;&0@"6QI:V4@82!C:&%N9V4@;V8@=F5N=64@=VET
M:"!O<'!O<G1U;FET:65S(&9O<B!N97<@8V]N=&%C=',@=&AA="`)=V]U;&0@
M8F4@=VEL;&EN9R!T;R!H96QP('5S(&]U="P@=&EM92!I<R!O9B!T:&4@97-S
M96YC92!W:71H(`ER96=A<F0@=&\@87)R86YG96UE;G1S(&%N9"!L:6-E;F-E
M<R!E=&,N($EF('EO=2!C86X@:&5L<"!O<B`)<F5Q=6ER92!A;GD@9G5R=&AE
M<B!D971A:6QS('!L96%S92!R97!L>2!A<V%P+@T*"0T*"4)O8F-`=V]O9&AI
M;&PN9&5M;VXN8V\N=6L-"@E";V)C0')O=F5R9&5N+F1E;6]N+F-O+G5K#0H)
>4F]B97)T+D-A<G1E<D!D;W,N=7,M<W1A=&4N9V]V
`
end


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:51 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: jpole simplified
Date: 9 Oct 1995 17:08:48 -0700
Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712,714-638-4133,805-294-9338)
Lines: 28
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <K$[e-mail]>
References: <44snhu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
Ken Harrison <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 4 Oct 1995, James Janota wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > James Janota
> > [e-mail]
> >
> >
> >
>
> Can't get much simpler than that...  ;-)
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> Ken Harrison   ---   [e-mail]   ---   Amateur Radio:  N6MHG
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>

No, no, no.  -- is 100% more complicated than -

(sorry, just I thought it is funny.)

---
Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:52 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Lock-ups
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!clint.bradford
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu,  5 Oct 95 09:41:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 18

Subject: Lock-ups

>>Does anyone else experience LOCK-UPS when you try to read your
>>own post?  I am using version 1.3.1 of WinCIM from CompuServe.

No, I sure didn't when I was using v1.3...

Call me voice at 909-681-6210 and leave your mailing address. I'll ship
you a copy of the current v1.4.

But check your directory structure and try cleaning up your messagebases
in the mean time - might be a corrupted file or something.


Clint Bradford
---
 * TLX v4.00 * ATTENTION to Details BBS - 909/681-6221 - EFF/AOP/ASP
 ■ wcECHO 4.1 ≈ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details ■ Mira Loma, CA ■ 909-681-6221


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:53 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.scott.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!tcsi.tcs.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Looking for SMALL BEAM antenna
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <459jkl$[e-mail]> <459t0a$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 12:12:16 GMT
Lines: 3

Hmmmm. Letsee, Where did I put that submini 80 meter beam?
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:53 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx05-06
From: [e-mail] (John Madras)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Loop Antenna
Date: 10 Oct 1995 10:17:37 GMT
Organization: The Realm BBS
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <45dh81$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx05-06.teleport.com
Summary: Need Info
Keywords: AM Radio
To: ALL
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

I'm looking for info to build a AM Loop Antenna for a Car Stereo
Receiver. Can anyone help?

Thanks in Advance


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!atc.ameritel.net![e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Great Circle Map software.
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 1995 16:37:59 GMT
Organization: American TeleCom
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <456c8m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: randy.ts3.ameritel.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I'm looking for a software package to print a fairly high resolution
great circle map centered on my qth.  I hope to print this map to a
clear slide and overlay it on my rotor's azimuthal display.

Any suggestions??

[e-mail]

KE3QZ



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:55 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!interaccess!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Robert Bylls)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Help Converting 3 Element Yagi
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 1995 15:32:58 GMT
Organization: InterAccess, Chicago's best Internet Service Provider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <45bf00$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: d191.nb.interaccess.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I recently picked up a 3 Element Yagi which I was told was used for
repeater operations.  I have not been able to get it to work
satisfactorily.  I can get a 1:1 SWR as low as 147.5 MHz but I need to
get it down to 145 MHz.  At 144.99, I get a 2:1 SWR reading.  I cannot
hit nodes that I can easily hit on a dipole.
Here are the details:
The elements are 3/4 inch aluminum tubing and 4-6  inches shorter
(depending on the element) than the designs  shown in the ARRL Antenna
Book..  The boom is 1 1/4 inches in diameter.  The driven element is a
solid piece of tubing (ie not a dipole), and matched with a gamma
match.

My question:  I have the ARRL Antenna Book checked out from the
library and the designs in it all use a dipole type driven element
with a hairpin match.  The ARRL design uses 3/16" elements.  Can I use
the same length dimensions as the ARRL Design before scaling because
of the different diameters.  Does the use of a gamma match have an
effect on the length of the driven element?

This is only my second antenna project (the first being a rabbit ear
dipole).  Thanks for all your help!


Robert Bylls
N9VDP
Carol Stream, IL



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:57 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!pacbell.com!well!miwok!pacific.net!!tvr
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need Info on Active VLF Ant Design
Date: 07 Oct 1995 04:18:32 GMT
Organization: Pacific Internet
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alive.mcn.org
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of Thu, 5 Oct 1995 10:02:44

   Joseph Carr. See "Small Loop Antennas for MW, AM BCB, LF and VLF Reception"-
   Elektor Electronics, June '94 and July '94 (excellent! Theory, with formulas
   & several practical designs. Wire loop type antennas. I built one- which
   works).
        ...

Those may be hard to find in the States, alas.

    Allan, are you familiar with the Longwave Club of America and their
    monthly bulletin called The Lowdown?  This group, of which I'm a member,
    often publishes details of active antenna projects for use in the LF and
    VLF range.  I don't have my back issues of Lowdown at hand now because of
    a household move, but you could contact one of their editors, such as John
    Davis ([e-mail]), who could put you in touch with someone who
    could provide circuits and construction details.  Good luck.

I saved a copy of this for my WWW pages:

    The monthly newsletter is called "The Lowdown" and is published
    by Bill Oliver, 45 Wildflower Road, Levittown, PA 19057.  The cost is
    $15 a year.  It cover all lowfer, medfer, and other interest in the VLF
    area.  I find it to be quite interesting.  Also, there is a couple of
    different systems available for computer operated beacons.  A lot of
    activity in all areas of the country.  Some are hams and other seem to
    be engineering types. I am in the process of building a station now.
                                [[e-mail] (Dale A. Hagert NM0H)]

Also:

    From the article "Ground Zero"  (Popular Electronics-Oct.'94):

                   1750-Meter Experimenters' Band:
                - 160-190 kHz          - Max. power-1watt
    - Max. antenna length-50 ft. including ground lead and transmission line
                           - Modulation-any
        - Out of band emissions must be supressed by 20 dB.

    The article suggests the following publication for further info:
        (says it contains equiptment designs)

         LOW and MEDIUM FREQUENCY SCRAPBOOK
    from-Ken Cornell
         225 Baltimore Ave.,             107 pages
         Point Pleasant Beach,           $18.75 first class mail
         NJ 08742

                         haven't seen it myself tho........

                                [[e-mail] (Jim Horner)]

Thanks for responding, KG5KP.  What should be noted is that the FCC only
limits the radiating antenna in this band.  What you use for receiving
is a matter between you and your local zoning authority [and maybe the
FAA if it's tall enough].

                                -- KD6PAG  (networking old-timer, RF newbie)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:58 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Q: Water in the coax
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 95 22:23:55 GMT
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (James D. Cronin) wrote:

>What harm does water do to coax cable?  I can see where it would
>mess up 9913 or even foam dielectric, but what about solid
>polyethelene?  How could it soak into that?  Or are there other
>bad things that happen, too.

The solid dielectric itself won't promote travel of the water, but it
doesn't seal it out, either.

Water can still creep in between the braid and the outer jacket, and to
a (usually) lesser extent, between the center conductor and the dielectric.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:58 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!iglou!iglou2!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Q: Water in the coax
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou2.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 01:36:16 GMT
Lines: 6

No kidding now, I had a 40 meter dipole fed with poly core coax. Water
traveled all the way down inside and dripped out the other end behind my
rig. I discovered this one day after smelling it. Yes, it stinks. It
didn't seem to hurt the swr but i doubt if it helped the losses any either.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:20:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Q: Water in the coax
Date: 8 Oct 1995 18:02:50 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4593oa$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.197.2.159
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (James D. Cronin) wrote:
>
>What harm does water do to coax cable?  I can see where it would
>mess up 9913 or even foam dielectric, but what about solid
>polyethelene?  How could it soak into that?  Or are there other
>bad things that happen, too.
>
>73...Jim  N2VNO


One bad this that's going to happen is corrosion.
This will turn the nice shiny copper into a green mess,
with an attendant increase in the insertion loss.

73, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:00 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!tcsi.tcs.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!eskimo!dalex
From: [e-mail] (Dave Alexander)
Subject: Re: Q: Water in the coax
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 15:00:42 GMT
Lines: 26

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>   [e-mail] (James D. Cronin) wrote:
>
>>What harm does water do to coax cable?  I can see where it would
>>mess up 9913 or even foam dielectric, but what about solid
>>polyethelene?  How could it soak into that?  Or are there other
>>bad things that happen, too.
>
>The solid dielectric itself won't promote travel of the water, but it
>doesn't seal it out, either.
>
>Water can still creep in between the braid and the outer jacket, and to
>a (usually) lesser extent, between the center conductor and the dielectric.
>
>73,
>
>Jack  WB3U


jack the question still stands. what harm does the water do
in solid dielectric coax?

dave




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:01 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!ifwtech.demon.co.uk
From: Ian G3SEK <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Q: Water in the coax
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 1995 19:25:20 GMT
Organization: IFWtech
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4593oa$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
X-Broken-Date: Monday, Oct 09, 1995 19.25.20
X-Newsreader: Newswin Alpha 0.7


:
: [e-mail] (James D. Cronin) wrote:
: >
: >What harm does water do to coax cable?  I can see where it would
: >mess up 9913 or even foam dielectric, but what about solid
: >polyethelene?  How could it soak into that?  Or are there other
: >bad things that happen, too.
: >
: >73...Jim  N2VNO
:
:
: One bad this that's going to happen is corrosion.
: This will turn the nice shiny copper into a green mess,
: with an attendant increase in the insertion loss.
:
: 73, Wes -- N7WS
:

Taking Wes's point further, braided conductors for RF rely
critically on good contact between the strands. When that goes
due to corrosion, the cable is useless. The foil-wrapped type is
affected a little less, but a corroded surface film will also
damage its conductivity and increase losses.

As Wes implies, the problem isn't due to moisture absorption
in the dielectric. That happens too, but corrosion of the outer
conductor is much more important.

Out of interest, I have just scrapped a length of very old RG8
which had no visible defects and still looked like new inside, but
had twice the insertion loss it should have - which was very
significant at 432MHz.

BTW, can anyone say how long ago RG8 was replaced by RG213 as the
current MIL spec?


--
73 from Ian G3SEK            Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
                            'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Professionally:
IFW Technical Services       Clear technical English - anywhere.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!buffnet2.buffnet.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (dave)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Quadrifilar Designs for 2M & 70CM Needed
Date: 8 Oct 1995 00:02:43 GMT
Organization: BuffNET
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4574f3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dppp21.buffnet.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.2

Greetings,

I would like to try a quadrifilar design antenna system for operating the microsats. I believe it will be the best
for a non-rotatable system. Would like to hear from anyone who has successfully built and worked the digi birds
with one of these antennas.

Thanks

Daveb


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!night.primate.wisc.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!news
From: Kevin Shea <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quadrifilar Designs for 2M & 70CM Needed
Date: 8 Oct 1995 00:26:53 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <4575sd$[e-mail]>
References: <4574f3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: f183-078.net.wisc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
        boundary="-------------------------------28761158381301"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------------------28761158381301
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

[e-mail] (dave) wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>I would like to try a quadrifilar design antenna system for operating the microsats. I believe it will be the best
>for a non-rotatable system. Would like to hear from anyone who has successfully built and worked the digi birds
>with one of these antennas.

****************************************
* Kevin G. Shea  N9JKP                 *
* 4460 Dahmen Pass                     *
* Cross Plains, WI 53528 USA           *
* 608.789.4326,voice; 608.798.1747,fax *
****************************************


---------------------------------28761158381301
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain



I've built 3 quadrifilar helix antennas.  They were for 144MHz, 443MHz and
1691 MHz.  I use the 2 meter one for 137MHz APT WxSats (with a preamp), it
performs very well.

These are the references that I found most useful:


Kilgus, C.C., "Multi-element Fractional Turn Helices," IEEE Trans.
Vol. AP-16, July 1968, pp 499-500

Kilgus, "Resoant Quadrifilar Helix Design," Microwave Journal, December
1970, pp 49-54

Bricker and Rickert "An S-Band Resonant Quadrifilar Antenna for Satellite
Communication,"  1974 International IEEE AP-S Symposium Digest, pp 78-82

Kilgus, " Spacecraft and Ground Station Applications of the Resonant
Quadrifilar Helix," 1974 International IEEE AP-S Symposium Digest, pp 75-77

ARRL, "Spacecraft Antennas,"  Chapter 20, pp 20-1 to 20-7, ARRL Antenna
Book, 15th Edition, 1988

Maxwell, "REFLECTIONS Transmissions Lines and Antennas", Chapter 22 The
Quadrifilar Helix Antenna, published by ARRL, 1990


The best articles are the Maxwell (this is in his book), the Bricker and the ARRL articles.
If you get Maxwell's book you don't really need to search further.

Let me know if you don't have access to any of these or if you have any other
questions.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Questions on setting up my Butternut HF6V-X
Date: 7 Oct 1995 21:26:42 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4579ci$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

I hope that someone can help me with a couple of questions I have about my
Butternut HF6V-X and verticals in general.

1.   Will I see a significant improvement in performance if I install the
antenna on the roof of my house as opposed to installing it on the ground
? On the ground I would be able to have a better ground radial system.

2. I have a Kenwood TS-450s/AT.  Do I need to worry about "fine tuning"
the antenna for absolutely the lowest SWR ?   I plan on following the
instructions carefully & letting the Auto-tuner do the rest.  Will I be
o.k. ?

I thank anyone who can help me with this !

Scott Powell
KD6GPV
Advanced since 1995 !


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!cadvision.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jen Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: R5 or R7
Date: 9 Oct 1995 20:15:52 GMT
Organization: CADVision
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <45bvto$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cad145.cadvision.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

I am thinking of buying a R5 or R7 vertical antenna.  If anyone out there
has one, or has had one, could you please tell me what you thought of it,
like the pros and cons of it.

Thank you,

Harold Wood
VE6 HFW
woodm@cadvision


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rooftop coupling distance for verticals
Date: 9 Oct 1995 21:12:53 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <45c38l$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu

I am planning to mount a Butternut vertical at rooftop level
but am concerned that the proximity of a 20' metal mast with a
vhf/uhf vertical on it (approx. 8-10' away from only available
site on the roof) might seriously affect the performance of the
HF vertical.  What kind of distance should I try to keep between
the vertical and the metal mast if possible?  Thanks.
Bill KB8USZ  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!microvst.demon.co.uk
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SGC SG230 Smartuner: Any good? Anybody use one?
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 95 21:52:50 GMT
Organization: Microvest Limited, London
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44u9rt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: microvst.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Jim Bromley, W5GYJ" writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>
>  "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >The SGC is designed to feed an unbalanced (single wire fed) antenna
> >against a good ground.  Your application does not appear to qualify.
> >I guess many of us have towers like yours, so tell us if you get this
> >to work :-)
>
> I would think that the SGC would work feeding a balun that could
> then feed the antenna.   If the length of coax between the balun
> and the SGC is quite short (less than a foot), the SGC will think
> it is tuning the antenna directly.

The poster is planning a 100 ft sloping dipole as an all-band hf doublet.

If you have a design for a balun which will perform adequately over the
impedance variations and frequency range involved, I would recommend
that you patent it before blurting a word about it around here :-)

--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:09 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Ted Viens)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SGC SG230 Smartuner: Any good? Anybody use one?
Date: 7 Oct 1995 11:41:13 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <455p0p$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44u9rt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-hou5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat Oct 07  4:41:13 AM PDT 1995

In <[e-mail]> "Anthony R. Gold"
<[e-mail]> writes:
>
>In article <[e-mail]>
>           [e-mail] "Jim Bromley, W5GYJ" writes:
>
>> In article <[e-mail]>
>>  "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>> >The SGC is designed to feed an unbalanced (single wire fed) antenna

>> >against a good ground.  Your application does not appear to
qualify.
>> >I guess many of us have towers like yours, so tell us if you get
this
>> >to work :-)
>>
>> I would think that the SGC would work feeding a balun that could
>> then feed the antenna.   If the length of coax between the balun
>> and the SGC is quite short (less than a foot), the SGC will think
>> it is tuning the antenna directly.
>
>The poster is planning a 100 ft sloping dipole as an all-band hf
doublet.
>
>If you have a design for a balun which will perform adequately over
the
>impedance variations and frequency range involved, I would recommend
>that you patent it before blurting a word about it around here :-)
>
>--
>   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
>
[e-mail]
>                                        packet:
g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na
---
That might be a winning move...
But First...  A quick review of the SGC SG230 manual (which is all that
I own and brings up the point that SGC is an easy to reach US company
eager to please customers and the maker of reasonably priced rugged
equipment) shows that it is intended to feed balanced antennas directly
by hooking one leg up to the center conductor of the output connector
and the other leg up to the ground lug on the case.  The case, of
course, will have to be floating which might imply the value of a choke
balun on the input coax, which steers this discussion directly into the
stormy seas of other threads in this group, which leaves me estatic
that I am blissfully too ignorant to contribute an informed opinion on
them, which causes me to willy-nilly appreciate the value of getting as
much metal in the sky as land and law will allow and impulsively use
some form of balun or actual dual winding toroidal transformer wherever
hunch, rumor, or superstition will induce me to...

Uhhh, oh, yes, a quick review of the SG230 manual will show the easy
suggested way to hook it up to a dipole, loop, or other balanced
antenna...
--
Bye...  Ted..
Deep in the Heart of the Armpits of Houston, Texas...


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:10 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!microvst.demon.co.uk
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SGC SG230 Smartuner: Any good? Anybody use one?
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 95 07:40:42 GMT
Organization: Microvest Limited, London
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44u9rt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <455p0p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: microvst.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

In article <455p0p$[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Ted Viens" writes:

> But First...  A quick review of the SGC SG230 manual (which is all that
> I own and brings up the point that SGC is an easy to reach US company
> eager to please customers and the maker of reasonably priced rugged
> equipment) shows that it is intended to feed balanced antennas directly
> by hooking one leg up to the center conductor of the output connector
> and the other leg up to the ground lug on the case.  The case, of
> course, will have to be floating which might imply the value of a choke
> balun on the input coax, .....

It sounds good.  I confess that I can remember only where my Smart Tuner
is (up on my roof) and not where I put its manual. Are there any special
precautions needed in connecting the 12v supply and the remote led
indicator output when the SGC-230 is installed with the earth lug and the
coax braid either RF hot or floating? From London SGC is not all that easy
to reach. Are they on email?

--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!ip083.phx.primenet.com!w5gyj
From: [e-mail] (Jim Bromley, W5GYJ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SGC SG230 Smartuner: Any good? Anybody use one?
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 11:33:22 MST
Organization: None
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <44u9rt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip083.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <455p0p$[e-mail]>
 [e-mail] (Ted Viens) writes:

>But First...  A quick review of the SG230 manual ... shows that it is
>intended to feed balanced antennas directly by hooking one leg up to the
>center conductor of the output connector and the other leg up to the ground
>lug on the case.  The case, of course, will have to be floating which might
>imply the value of a choke balun on the input coax, which steers this
>discussion directly into the stormy seas of other threads in this
>group...

If he does that, it might also be a good idea to decouple the power and
control wires from the tuner as well.  The ground power lead is
capacitively bypassed to the RF ground lug and the other signals
bypassed to that ground.  Then, of course, the problem arises of
what to do with the rest of the tower.  I agree with you, however, that
the real thing is to throw something up and try it.

Jim
W5GYJ



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:12 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Stacking Antennas - UHF/Sat
Date: 8 Oct 1995 23:19:35 GMT
Organization: MagicNet, Inc.
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <459ma7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm4-01.magicnet.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.09

I have read and read all sorts of books and get mixed information on stacking antennas.
I have HyGain7030SAT 70cm cross yagi for sat., and I want to stack them.

If they are stacked, then you need a phasing harness, and this is the issue.
I understand that I should use the following formula...468/fmhz * 2 and this gives
me the feet of 1-wavelength, then multiply by .66 for the velocity factor for RG9
coax and then divide by 4 to get the 1/4 wavelength and then multiply by an odd
number say 7 to get the length of coax for each antenna to the coax "T". Then
run from the "T" to the radio.

I do this and I get 2.2:1 SWR...I have the antennas spaced 32" apart.

Is it the harness or the spacing or both?

Hygain does not make a harness. HELP!!!!!!!!!


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:13 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!soap.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news00.sunet.se!sunic!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news1.transpac.net!news2.transpac.net!news.tripnet.se!news
From: [e-mail] (Ulf Lange)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toriod for impedance matching
Date: 5 Oct 1995 23:58:14 GMT
Organization: Tripnet AB
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <451rem$[e-mail]>
References: <44pppm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: styx21.tripnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

In article <44pppm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>I have used some time to figure out how to impedance match my
>beverage, after having read an article in the 1988 edition of
>Proceedings.
>
>Now, the problem is that in Sweden I cannot get hold of the Amidon
>FT50-43 core mentionen in the article.

Check with ELFA/ELTEMA in Malm÷ at 040 - 21 66 80
or ELFA in Stockholm 08 - 735 35 35.

They both carry Amidon core products.

73's de SM6FYQ/Ulf



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:13 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!taco.cc.ncsu.edu!n00099-104afc.unity.ncsu.edu!jwprice
From: [e-mail] (James Warren Price)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Trying to build better antenaa to improve FM.  FAQ?
Date: 5 Oct 1995 01:07:52 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <44vb58$[e-mail]>
References: <44v29q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n00099-104afc.unity.ncsu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Matt Lang ([e-mail]) wrote:

:       I'd like to improve my FM reception.

Are you talking FM broadcast (~88-108 MHz)?  Radio shack has a
directional rooftop antenna for $20.  Hard to beat the price, but you
could definitely improve the design for increased gain if you put some
time into it.

A friend recently asked me the same question.  I recommended going with
Radio Shack (even though I don't care for RS in general).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Price, ARS N3QYE                         Don't blame me.
[e-mail]                  I voted for Emma Goldman.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:15 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!news.cerf.net!ent-img.com!wb6hqk!bart
From: [e-mail] (Bart Rowlett)
Subject: Re: Windom Antenna users?
Organization: wb6hqk
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <44ervt$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 17:29:08 GMT
Lines: 38

In article <44ervt$[e-mail]>, Glen Roberts  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I'm looking for information from anyone who is using
>a Windom antenna(80m) and can comment on such things
>as performance compared to dipoles, grounding and RF
>in the shack.  I have information on the OCF dipole
>but need info on the Windom from hams who have used
>them.  Thanks.

I've used a classic windom fed with a single wire feeder as a makeshift
antenna for portable use and have found it to be quite useful.  My mobile
installation uses an SGC-230 autotuner and I disconnect the mobile loading
coil and connect the single wire feeder to the mast section and am able
to tune the 75m windom with 22 foot feeder on 160 through 10 meters.  On
160 it acts primarily like a very short vertical with lot's of top loading.
On 75 meters it acts like a halfwave dipole and it gets a bit complicated
on the higher bands.  On all bands it will radiate a bit of vertically
polarized along with horizontal making it useful if you don't have
any particular pattern/radiation pattern in mind.

In residential areas you probably want to minimize vertical polarization
and potential RF in the shack and probably want to stay away from
any sort of unbalance including any off center fed antenna such as
a windom or off center fed dipole.  The situation improved dramatically
at the home station when I went from an off center fed 75m inverted vee
to center fed with open wire line.  The original antenna was off
center fed at about 1/3 : 2/3, had a minimum feedline length, actually
looked attractive from the street and caused all sorts of RFI, TVI
with the neighbors on the low bands along with a high noise level and
apparently high losses.  Changing to a center feed inproved the NVIS
performance on 75 and reduced receive noise and made it much easier
to feed on 40. The only problem is the 40m pattern is now directed
north-south instead of east-west where I would prefer.

bart   wb6hqk

[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with 448mhz beam construction.."
Date: 9 Oct 95 21:12:38 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "info on gap antennas??"
Date: 7 Oct 95 14:28:59 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

File on does not exist.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "info on gap antennas??"
Date: 7 Oct 95 14:29:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

File gap does not exist.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 10 10:21:18 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "info on gap antennas??"
Date: 7 Oct 95 14:29:01 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

File antennas?? does not exist.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:28 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!rain.fr!news.jet.es!not-for-mail
From: Tony <[e-mail]>
Subject: (no subject)
Message-ID: <ab7cb$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 23:57:20 GMT
Organization: jet.es
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Lines: 10



--
    Tony Guerrero Esquina       AX25Net : [e-mail]
    Apdo  677   CP  01080       AMPRNet : [e-mail]
[44.133.01.32]
    VITORIA  ( ALAVA )          E-mail  : [e-mail]
           SPAIN





From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:29 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!nwlink.com!usenet
From: maurice norris <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m Quad Antenna
Date: 12 Oct 1995 22:16:51 GMT
Organization: Northwest Link
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <45k44j$[e-mail]>
References: <44r8f2$[e-mail]> <45h45o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port19.annex3.nwlink.com

> > Im looking for plans to a 2m Quad Antenna.  Im interested in building
> > one.  Any information will be greatly appreciated.
>   Try looking in the January '95 QST page 67.You will find a 5 element 2m quad.
>  If you cant find it I can "E" mail it to you.
>   KC7EXG   Mo   [e-mail]


    FIVE ELEMENT 2 METER QUAD
designed by KD6GLF taken from January '95 QST pg 67 modified by KC7EXG
        LENGTHS and SPACINGS
                Element         Spreader        Spacing from
Element         Length          Length          end of boom
                (inches(        (inches)        (reflector end)
Reflector       88              31.25           2.5
Driven          82              29              19.5
1st.Director    80              28.5            32.5
2nd.Director    78              27.75           48.5
3rd.Director    76              27              67.5

Gain is said to be 11 db.or more.

Connect coax to left or rigth corner for virtical polarization.
Connect coax to top or bottom corner for horizontal polarization.

Boom is made from 2x2 8 feet long.Spreaders were originaly made from doweling.
Modification is to make spreaders from scrap from a cabinet shop.
Spreaders should be approx.3/4x3/8 and glued and stapled to the boom.

Elements are made from 10 solid copper wire.

Material needed for construction.
1       2x2 8ft long (Boom)
10 3/8x3/4x36   scrap hardwood(Speaders)
7ft.    10 gauge solid copper wire(Elements)
        Coax and connectors for feed line.
        Sealer for coax and wood(spray works best)

        KC7EXG Mo Norris


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!Rezonet.net!news.pubnix.net!mba!juxta!michael.black
From: [e-mail] (Michael Black)
Date: 12 Oct 95 10:41:24
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m Quad Antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: MtlNet (MBA.org) Juxtaposition BBS. [phone]
Lines: 16

I forget who started this thread, I already posted some
comments on finding info on building 2M quad antennas.

I just want to add that the issue of QST on the newsstand
right now, I'm not sure what the cover date is, has an
article on building a 2 element 2meter quad antenna.  It's
in that section for newcomers.  Unless you're looking for
something bigger, this is probably a really good place to
start.  Besides, until the issue disappears from the newsstand,
it's the most easily available source of how to build one.

     Michael  VE2BVW
--
| InterNet: [e-mail]
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly their own.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!lily.redrose.net!john
From: Curt Sanders <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m. Quad SWR 'necktie'
Date: 13 Oct 1995 01:30:28 GMT
Organization: a Digital Internet AlphaServer Site
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <45kffk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.51.81.217
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

I'm still a newbie to amateur radio and maybe an 'OM' can give me a
semi-technical explanation of the following:

I have a homebrew 4 ele. quad for 2 meters that was varying in SWR (1:3
- 1:9 ish) across that band. I wasn't satisfied with that SWR so I made
a 'necktie' -- about 24 inches of the lead-in coax tied together and
bound by an aluminum 1 inch tubing discard I had used for building
another antenna. That dropped the SWR down to almost 1:1 at mid-band!
Was I bringing the impedence down or what?

73's in advance de [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:31 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!timbuk.cray.com!equalizer!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Steven B Reed)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 5/8 Super J Pole for 2M
Date: 11 Oct 95 13:08:18 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

        I built the "Super J pole" for 2M in the '94 ARRL Ant. book.
It is getting a little warn out and I am thinking of replacing it.
(Well that and I love to build antennas)  I remember reading recently
that a 5/8 J pole has a lower angle of radiation and/or more gain.

Question one is:
                If I want to stack the extra 5/8 radiator on top
                could somebody help me with the dimetions of the
                phasing stub. (Most of the commercial ant's are stacked
                5/8 sections so I *assume* that is can be done)

And number two:
                Can the phasing stub be wound as a coil instead of
                sticking so far out like in the previously mentioned
                Ant book article.  Ie: I would like to enclose the whole
                thing inside a piece of PVC pipe. (inch and half or so
                and scedule 40 for strenth)

        If I have overlooked any simple antenna fundementals please
explain them.  I would rather learn than get flamed.  I was unable to
find the answers to any of these questions in the Antenna Book.  So...
If you can reconmend the next book that a 1st year ham *must* have for
antenna building my mail box is open.

                        Thanks in advance

                        73 de KB8STB  Steve
 ###


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!mcshub!hwfn!ae414
From: [e-mail] (Harland MacKenzie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
Date: 11 Oct 1995 02:01:40 GMT
Organization: Hamilton-Wentworth FreeNet, Ontario, Canada.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <45f8i4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Fellow Netters,
        I am having real trouble getting any contacts on HF.  First I
hold an advanced class lic. with 5WPM code so in Canada that means 80m.
I have tried several different ideas for an antenna with no luck.  I was
using a mobile whip that worked quite well on the west coast ( ex VE7HMI )
but this setup does not produce the same results in Ontario.  I have bought
a MFJ artifical RF ground since I am on the 8th floor with no real ground
available and that did seem to keep rf out of the shack.
        I have tried various lengths of wire run along the balcony with
worse results on receive than the mobile whip.  I even tried loading the
metal balcony railing directly --- can you say TVI ?  The balcony is too
short for a dipole so that will not even work.  I am about 60 feet above
the ground but the only trees are over the main street.
        Any ideas that I could try on a 25 foot balcony ?
        I am working on code to get access to higher frequency but I am
dsylexic so the 5WPM was a real battle, 12WPM is not going well.
        Any good ideas ( poor ones also welcomed ) ?
                                        73 de VE3HMI   Harland

--
Harland MacKenzie, B.Eng., M.Eng.
Dundas, Ontario
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
VE3HMI on 146.895-


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
Date: 13 Oct 1995 05:54:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45ld0v$[e-mail]>
References: <45g8qu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

But for goodness sakes DON'T put up anything anyone else can touch or
anything that can touch a power line if the wind blows or the antenna
falls! We don't want to read any stories about you!
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:35 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de!gelleric
From: [e-mail] (Wolfgang Gellerich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
Date: 13 Oct 1995 10:39:12 GMT
Organization: Informatik, Uni Stuttgart, Germany
Lines: 28
Sender: gelleric@kafka (Wolfgang Gellerich)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45lfkg$[e-mail]>
References: <45f8i4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kafka.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de

In article <45f8i4$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Harland MacKenzie) writes:
|> Fellow Netters,
|>      I am having real trouble getting any contacts on HF.  First I
|> hold an advanced class lic. with 5WPM code so in Canada that means 80m.
|> I have tried several different ideas for an antenna with no luck.  I was
|> using a mobile whip that worked quite well on the west coast ( ex VE7HMI )
|> but this setup does not produce the same results in Ontario.  I have bought
|> a MFJ artifical RF ground since I am on the 8th floor with no real ground
|> available and that did seem to keep rf out of the shack.
|>      I have tried various lengths of wire run along the balcony with
|> worse results on receive than the mobile whip.  I even tried loading the
|> metal balcony railing directly --- can you say TVI ?  The balcony is too
|> short for a dipole so that will not even work.  I am about 60 feet above
|> the ground but the only trees are over the main street.
|>      Any ideas that I could try on a 25 foot balcony ?
|>      I am working on code to get access to higher frequency but I am
|> dsylexic so the 5WPM was a real battle, 12WPM is not going well.
|>      Any good ideas ( poor ones also welcomed ) ?
|>                                      73 de VE3HMI   Harland

Try a magnetic loop ! This is the most compact antenna for HF rx and tx. I am
just planning one for indoor usage.

However, yielding good tx performance esp. on longwave band (i.e., 80m and 40m)
requires knowlegde about problems and properties that are typical for magnetic
loops -- the ARRL Antenna Book, chapter 5 is a good source.

vy 73, Wolfgang DJ3TZ


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antenna/grounding question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <v01510101ac9f38850900@[157.178.121.1]>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 14:03:10 GMT
Lines: 88
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16435 rec.radio.amateur.misc:93022

In article <v01510101ac9f38850900@[157.178.121.1]> [e-mail] (Bob Brown) writes:
>My shack is in the closet on the 2nd floor of my 2-story duplex.
>I have a nice flat roof upon which I would like to put some antenna's.
>There is no conveinent ground within the shack (no cold water pipes etc).
>
>My ideas:
>
>I am thinking of putting an opening in the roof to get from my radio's to
>any antenna's that I put on the roof.
>I put a ground-rod into the ground.
>I have a cable (how big and what type) going from the ground-rod up the
>side of my brick duplex, accross the
>roof and into my shack, thereby providing a safety ground for the equipment
>within my shack.
>
>I will, of course, want the antenna to be groundable when not in use for
>lightning protection...
>
>1) Does the above scenerio sound like a good idea?

It's acceptable. You really need more than one ground rod to present
an effective Earth connection, but Code is satisfied by one. The wire
must be a minimum of #10 copper or #8 aluminum, though heavier is
better. In fact, flat smooth copper strap is preferred. Copper strap
sold as "roof flashing" in 5 inch width works fine. You want to run
it without *any* sharp bends, in as straight a line as possible from
the Earth terminal to a plate in your station you'll designate as
your *ground window*. *Every* wire that enters or leaves your station,
including power and telco (if you have a phone in the shack), must
be tied to this plate when it enters or leaves the station. Those
wires that are nominally "ground" can be tied directly to the plate,
those nominally "hot" must be tied to the plate through a suitable
suppressor.

>2) How can I connect the antenna to ground when not in use (have a 2nd wire
>going from the ground-rod to the antenna
>   but go through some sort of switch on the side of my house to connect
>ground so the antenna isn't grounded
>    when it's being used)??????

You can do that, but if you tie the feeder through your ground window
with the proper suppression, it'll already be done for you with nothing
to remember to connect or disconnect. Unless you're confident you've
provided a low impedance connection, disconnecting the coax jumper between
the radio and the ground window can be a good idea when storms are in
the area. Remember, a lightning bolt that's just travelled miles through
open air isn't going to have any trouble bridging any reasonable set of
switch contacts you can employ. What you want to do is to offer it a
low enough impedance path to Earth that it won't be "tempted" to take
an alternative path through your equipment, or you.

>3) What kind of groundrod and cable?

Code requires a minimum of a 8 foot 5/8ths inch diameter rod and either
#10 copper or #8 aluminum wire. You want to do better than that. I'd
suggest at minimum 4 rods, arranged with one central and the other
three on 120 degree radial spacing, with every rod spaced at least twice
its length from its nearest neighbor. (That prevents charge saturation
in overlap volumes of the cylinders of soil engaged by each rod.) Those
radial rods should be tied back to the central rod using the 5 inch
copper flashing mentioned above. (You can direct bury these straps.)
The only connection to the Earth terminal should be via the central
rod. This is called single point grounding, and is a must to avoid
ground loops.

>4) How to space the cable from the side of my house and my roof to prevent
>any problems should it have to carry a large discharge from static/lightning?

The flashing doesn't have to be stood off at all, though if you use wire
it can get hot enough during the surge to set wooden siding on fire, so
it should be spaced at least 8 inches off the surface.

>5) I have heard something about a code requirement that all ground systems
>within a house must be interconnected...
>   I don't know how the ground for my electrical system is set-up, but
>would I get into code-trouble by even
>   installing a ground-rod for my radios/antennas and ignoring the
>electrical ground system?

Yes, Code requires all ground terminals be interconnected. If you use
the ground window technique I mentioned, this will occur automatically.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!satisfied.apocalypse.org!news2.near.net!xap!usenet
From: thorburn@.xyplex.com (Gary Thorburn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any FM antenna designs?
Date: 11 Oct 1995 13:12:09 GMT
Organization: Xyplex, Inc., Littleton, Massachusetts USA
Lines: 19
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45gfr9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: thorburn@.xyplex.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gwt.xyplex.com

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>   [e-mail] wrote:
>
> Radio Shack sells a $14.99 omnidirectional FM antenna that works very
> well.  It's much smaller that a multielement beam and you won't have to
> worry about turning it.  For $19.99, they also sell a 5-element FM beam.

The 5-element beam is really quite good, in my experience.  I have it
attic mounted.

/****
*  Gary W. Thorburn  KD1TE
*  reply address:  [e-mail]
****/







From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!elvis.delphi.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Anyone Use Quagi HF Beam?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 20:19:43 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 8

N7RP used one years ago in the Phoenix, AZ area and it worked great! It
was a little ackward but not anymore than a regular quad.
There seemed to be a bit better performance than a TH6 tribander but not
as good as a 3 element quad on a decent boom length (25').
I don't know if Alan is still active.
Regards, Al




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bob Nagy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BFD Dipole design..Comments?
Date: 12 Oct 1995 21:24:23 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <45k127$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kreblon.botany.utexas.edu
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

Well, my old rhombic dream antenna finally blew down during an 85 mile
wind. Actually lost a 4"x4" wolmanized pole (snapped). Im looking to try
another design. The remaining parts will support the following..

140' of 1/2" 75 ohm cable TV allumifoam with big toroidal transformers
(50 to 75 ohm unbalenced to unbalenced) on each end. A 520 foot dipole fed
from 75 ft point on my main tower, down to two of the old rhombic poles.
(32 ft tall) 10 gauge insulated wire.

Has anyone tried using such long dipoles on all bands with a tuner?
(Icom AT-150)

Calculated resonant freq?...890Khz!

Suggestions?

Thanks!  Bob Nagy


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BFD Dipole design..Comments?
Date: 13 Oct 1995 13:43:43 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45lqef$[e-mail]>
References: <45k127$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <45k127$[e-mail]>,
Bob Nagy <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Has anyone tried using such long dipoles on all bands with a tuner?

Hi Bob, you will get very little broadside radiation from such an
antenna. Most of your power will be in 4 end-fire lobes (two on each
end, like a stretched cloverleaf).

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:40 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!titan.ksc.nasa.gov!kscdl1.cad.ksc.nasa.gov!k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov!user
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Brand-X Autotuner, Brand-Y Radio?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 12:17:17 -0400
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Nntp-Posting-Host: k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov
Lines: 13

I am considering options that would benefit from using an Icom Autotuner
with a Kenwood radio, as well as one using a Kenwood Autotuner with an
Icom radio.

A Ham equipment salesman told me that the Kenwood AT-50 Autotuner could be
rewired for use with an HF rig made by another company (Alinco?).  Also, I
had the impression that the SGC Autotuners were adaptable to other brands.

Does anyone know if there is any commonality in control cables between the
Kenwood, Icom and SGC Autotuners?  If so, could you provide information
that might help to interface between them?

73, Fred, K4DII


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dimensional.com!winternet.com!ppp-66-119.dialup.winternet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John B.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: CB RADIO: Need Dipole Antenna Design, Also Looking for Beam Design
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 10:24:44 -0500
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-66-119.dialup.winternet.com

Hello New to the newsgroup so please be patient, and hope I am posting
this in the right places.

My brother and I wish to build an Dipole antenna for a CB Radio
operating or tuned to 27.185 Mhz.

I am really looking for a design we used to call (in the 70's) a
"Trick Stick"

We have done some reading on the subject but the book was pretty poor
in offering designs.

If anyone has a design, construction instructions, and SWR Tuneing
instructions that we could use to construct a 1/4 wave beam based on a
Dipole antenna we would really be happy.

We are hoping to use the purposed 1/4 wave dipole antenna as the
antenna element to produce a Directional antenna, so if you have
designs for Directional antenna's please send them or point them out
for me.

Please e-mail  [e-mail]

Thanks
JOHN BIRRENBACH


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lamarck.sura.net!news.uky.edu!news
From: [e-mail] (Terry Fugate)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cell-phone antenna: useful?
Date: 12 Oct 1995 12:54:05 GMT
Organization: IT
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <45j35d$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44eel0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.163.13.56
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (131J50000-WelchBJ(DR3215)283) says:
>
>Rick Rikoski ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: Sure you can use your cell phone antenna for 2m and 70cm. The coax and
>: mount are fine. (If they work at 900mHz they'll surely work at lower
>: frequencies). The antenna itself is the wrong length.It won't load right
>: and you might burn out your transmitter final.
>
>: You have three choices here. Unscrew the antenna section and screw in a
>: section of whip which is the right length.This means either buying a new
>: antenna which has the trap coil for 2m/70cm and matching the screw
>: threads. Or threading some rod stock, cut for one band, then screwing it
>: into the mount. or doing the same for dual band by fabricating and
>: inserting a loading coil in the middle of the antenna whip.
>
>Hmmm.  Now I'm confused.  I called a local guru and was told the
>mount needs to be replaced.  He said that since the inductive
>mount is tuned for a certain frequency, running it at 2m/70cm
>wouldn't work.
>
>I'd be delighted if I could just get a new antenna whip and screw it
>in place.  Maybe I should plan on using an SWR to make sure I don't
>fry my radio...
>
>Can anyone else offer clarification to all this?
>
>thanks,
>-Bryan
>
>--
>Bryan J. Welch, AT&T Bell Laboratories - [e-mail] - N0SFG
>Pohl's law: Nothing is so good that somebody, somewhere, will not hate it

I am using a "standard" cell/trunking antenna for both 2mtr and 70cm.
The antenna is  direct feed type.  If yours couples thru the glass, the
capacitive plates are way too small for either 70cm or 2mtr.  You can
use the existing matching network for receive on both 2mtrs and 70cm,
BUT you CAN NOT transmit thru it.  The swr is so high that my Diawa could
not read it.  It was just like feeding 10' or so of unterminated coax.
Yea I know that my antenna is only 18" but the swr is about 1.2 at 146
and a lot less than 2:1 on 70CM.  My antenna just blends in, no longer do
the police in small eastern Ky towns give my car a long hard glance.  I
used to have a mobile antenna farm(you know the omnipresent 5/8 2mtr,
70cm, 10mtr mess) My wifes like the "lean, uncluttered look".  Of course
I will be the first to admit that this setup does not have the range of
my old one.  But who really needs to bring up repeaters 80miles away,
you can not really hold the repeater anyway.
.............................................................................
Terry Fugate
UKTV
University of Kentucky
"The opinions expressed herein are mine, and soley mine.  They do not
represent the official view of the University of Kentucky,
the State of Kentucky, or any agency of any government.
If you do not like my opinion, just get on with your life.
I will not change your mind and you damn sure can not change mine."


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!brutus.bright.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!INbe.net!innet.be!usenet
From: Ken DESMET <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
Date: 13 Oct 1995 12:08:40 GMT
Organization: INnet NV (post doesn't reflect views of INnet NV)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <45lks8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sdt.innet.be

Hi,

Does anyone know a company named "CHASE" who builds antennas for
measuring 30MHz to 1GHz EMC/EMI emmisions. Any tips around this
would be very welcome.
Meany thanks in advance for your hints.

Ken             ([e-mail])


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!Belgium.EU.net!ping.be!dialup17.hasselt.eunet.be!jan.anker
From: [e-mail] (Jan Anker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 01:22:57
Organization: Anchor Datacomm
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45lks8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup17.hasselt.eunet.be
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

In article <45lks8$[e-mail]> Ken DESMET <[e-mail]> writes:
>From: Ken DESMET <[e-mail]>
>Subject: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
>Date: 13 Oct 1995 12:08:40 GMT

>Hi,

>Does anyone know a company named "CHASE" who builds antennas for
>measuring 30MHz to 1GHz EMC/EMI emmisions. Any tips around this
>would be very welcome.
>Meany thanks in advance for your hints.

>Ken             ([e-mail])
yes, this antenna is offered through several channels but is made by chase.
No info about chase here at home, but the Rohde&Schwarz name for the same
antenna (made by chase) is CBL 6111. tel nr R&S [phone].

Jan  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!tecsun1.tec.army.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil!user
From: [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS)
Subject: Coax 9913/LM-400
Message-ID: <mike_cash-1110950958050001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Organization: nawc
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 17:58:05 GMT
Lines: 6

Anyone know the difference between Belden 9913 and Times Microwave
LM-400?  I know that HRO sells both for .69/ft.  Will they work on a
rotatable beam without breaking?  Thanks

--
Mike, KN6IS


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.sunbelt.net!dial-9.t1.tngnbo.sunbelt.net!k8doc
From: [e-mail] (Rick Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax 9913/LM-400
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 06:54:48 CST
Organization: SunBelt.Net INTERNET Access
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <mike_cash-1110950958050001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-9.t1.tngnbo.sunbelt.net
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <mike_cash-1110950958050001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil> [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS)
>Subject: Coax 9913/LM-400
>Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 17:58:05 GMT

>Anyone know the difference between Belden 9913 and Times Microwave
>LM-400?  I know that HRO sells both for .69/ft.  Will they work on a
>rotatable beam without breaking?  Thanks

>--
>Mike, KN6IS


I have been told the loss figures are better than 9913, don't have 9913
figures in front of me however the loss  in LM400 is:

100 mHz     1.2 dB
400 MHz     2.5 dB
1000           3,9 dB
 Uses the same connectors.
My information source is the latest Antenex Catalog

If the costruction is similiar, and I assume it is you would need to use a
pigtail of something else at the rotor


Rick   K8DOC


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.us.world.net!ns2.mainstreet.net!ftp.netgate.net!ng59.netgate.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Bob Martin N6MZV)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax 9913/LM-400
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 21:13:00 -0700
Organization: NetGate Communications
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <mike_cash-1110950958050001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ng59.netgate.net

In article <mike_cash-1110950958050001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>,
[e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS) wrote:

> Anyone know the difference between Belden 9913 and Times Microwave
> LM-400?  I know that HRO sells both for .69/ft.  Will they work on a
> rotatable beam without breaking?  Thanks
>
> --
> Mike, KN6IS

LM400 is a bit lower loss, and is much more flexible than 9913-
LM400 uses a copper clad aluminum center conductor and a special
foam/solid dielectric. Uses the same connectors as 9913. LM400 is
far less likely to imitate a garden hose if you don't seal the
connectors really well. You should be able to use LM400 if done
carefully to minimize stress (I've got 9913 going to one set of
antennas, and LM400 on the others- if I had it to do again, I'd use
LM400 for the whole lot- the LM400 jacket also seems to be holding up
better in the weather).

73-

--

Bob Martin N6MZV          * [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger A. Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Design S/W
Date: 13 Oct 1995 13:34:11 GMT
Organization: Telex Communications, Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <45lpsj$arq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

The software MININEC and NEC-2 are available in the public
domain.  You can find these at ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC
as well as ftp.funet.fi/pub/ham/antenna/NEC.

73, Roger WB0DGF


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 95 20:39:33 GMT
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4493kh$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

This is an addendum to my previous post showing flux densities for various
toroid cores.  I decided to add a few examples for the FT-240 size.

Table represents 1KW / 1K ohm:

CORE    Turns   Freq.   E rms   Flux
FT-240  8       1.8     1,000   996.22 |
FT-240  10      1.8     1,000   796.98 | 150 maximum allowed
FT-240  12      1.8     1,000   664.15 |

FT-240  8       28      1,000   64.043 |
FT-240  10      28      1,000   51.234 | 30 maximum allowed
FT-240  12      28      1,000   42.695 |


Table represents 1KW / 50 ohm:

CORE    Turns   Freq.   E rms   Flux
FT-240  8       1.8     225     224.15 |
FT-240  10      1.8     225     179.32 | 150 maximum allowed
FT-240  12      1.8     225     149.43 |

FT-240  8       28      225     14.41  |
FT-240  10      28      225     11.528 | 30 maximum allowed
FT-240  12      28      225     9.6064 |


At this point, I have a question regarding the use of one of these cores
to build an output link for a tuner.  Let's say the primary has 30 or more
turns and is parallel-resonated.  The secondary consists of perhaps half
as many turns, and is fed directly to ladder line.  Let's also say the
ladder line presents 1,000 ohms across the secondary.

Under these conditions, is flux density determined by the impedance and
number of turns of the primary, secondary, or both?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:51 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!news.aa.net!tsunami.ixa.net!baja.pacificrim.net!news.tamu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 9 Oct 1995 09:08:18 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 43
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45b6s2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>>Nope, it's the same thing all over again. Remember the rules of the
balun:
>>
>>a------]]]]]]]]]]-------c
>>b------]]]]]]]]]]--------d
>>
>>a to c must = b to d voltage differential
>>a to b must = c to d voltage differential
>
>Hi Tom,
>
>I can certainly see how this particular balun must do that if the
>ratio of the windings is 1:1.  However, the coaxial balun doesn't
>seem to follow this rule, according to the test setup in Reflections.
>

Hi Jack,

It makes NO difference if the balun is wound from a twisted pair, coax, or
speaker wire!
All choke baluns follow those rules. That's why I frown on those
explainations that the inner and outer shield can be treated as separate
conductors. It explains the current flow on the shield itself, but not
what happens at the connection to the outside world!

>The a-c voltage and b-d voltage are dependant on the load placed on
>each output of the balun, although their sum will equal the total
>voltage at the input to the balun.
>
No, the voltages here are the DIFFERENCES from a to c,and b to d. These
pairs of voltage MUST be equal and share common phase because the balun is
a 1:1 transformer in this mode, even when wound with coax. The voltage
does not have to equal the a to b difference. The a to b difference only
has to equal the c to d difference.

This has been one of my points all along. These are the RULES a choke
balun follows, wound with coax or NOT, they all work the same.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!convex!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 95 21:13:49 GMT
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45ejd0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>ALL agreed to in general. Because moving the balun does nothing to
>.......oh never mind. :-)

Tom, I still don't agree that moving it does *nothing*.  However, common
mode voltages/currents can obvioualy ruin its performance.

At any rate, it appears these voltages/currents increase as a function
of feedpoint impedance, although the mechanism isn't entirely clear to
me yet.  Whether we're in total agreement on all this or not, or whether
you or I understand every fine point to the total picture, the bottom
line is, a different solution is needed.

>I have a question Jack, do the articles mentioned imply moving the
>balun does anything to help the common mode problem???

Tom, I now have four rather lengthy and complex discourses on this to
analyze and compare, including the one contained in your post.  At the
risk of having to recant, I think the answer is "no".  Believe it or not,
you and I are in agreement on this point. (!)  I'll be surprised if the
information I've received recently does anything less than confirm the
presence of these voltages, and that these tuners are unable to reduce
them to manageable levels.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:53 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!panix!news.eecs.umich.edu!newshost.marcam.com!news.netins.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 10 Oct 1995 16:00:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 60
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45ejd0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>Charlie Lofgren, W6JJZ, wrote to me yessterday and sent an analysis of
>the input balun / tuner circuit. With regard to the analysis, Charlie
included a few >additional notes that I will paraphrase:
>
Hi Jack,
<SNIP>
ALL agreed to in general. Because moving the balun does nothing to
......oh never mind. :-) I have a question Jack, do the articles mentioned
imply moving the balun does anything to help the common mode problem???

>3.)  Charlie would like to see someone do an understandable treatment,
>but in some detail, of the determinants of the common-mode impedance
>represented by R4 in the diagram below.  Any electrical engineers in the
>audience, please step to the stage.

Jack, this problem goes back to what the antenna really looks like. The
common mode impedance can NOT be represented in real life by a simple
component connected to ground, the real world analysis is much more
complicated.

If the antenna is a perfectly balanced dipole with zero feedline length,
and if the ground system *in the station* were perfect, the model could
look like this:
           I<R3>I
a----------]]]]]]]]----c---R1----gnd
b--gnd---]]]]]]]]----d---R2----gnd

R4 would always be zero ohms in this specific case, so R1 and 2 could just
be grounded. R3 is the common mode impedance of the balun, and you would
have to analyze a perfect choke balun as a 1:1 transformer with R3 across
either winding. The analysis must be sure the balun follows ALL choke
balun rules of operation.

The real world circuit is too complicated to draw in this format, but
would look similar to this:
             I<Zb>I                     <Zp>
a----------]]]]]]]]]]---c---------o-Z1----------o-Z2-o-----infinite
current sink
b--o------]]]]]]]]]]---d---------o-Z1-----------o-Z3-o-----infinite
current sink
    ^---------------------Zg---------infinite current sink

The differential mode antenna Z is Z1 (connected across the line between
the two o's).
Z2 and Z3 are each legs individual common mode impedance.
Zp is the parallel mode impedance of the transmission line.
Zg is the station's ground impedance (connnected to o near b).
Zb is the balun impedance.

The tuner could be treated as an auto-transformer or black box with phase
shift.

Roy, please help here. Is infinite current sink acceptable jargon or is
there a more common term I haven't heard? I hate to use ground, because
there really doesn't need to be any ground connection or ground based
coupling in this.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:55 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 11 Oct 1995 07:52:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 61
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45gb6r$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>At this point, I have a question regarding the use of one of these cores
>to build an output link for a tuner.  Let's say the primary has 30 or
more
>turns and is parallel-resonated.  The secondary consists of perhaps half
>as many turns, and is fed directly to ladder line.  Let's also say the
>ladder line presents 1,000 ohms across the secondary.
>
>Under these conditions, is flux density determined by the impedance and
>number of turns of the primary, secondary, or both?
>
>

Jack,
Here's where you have to be careful, because the loaded Q of the circuit
comes into play when the core is used in a resonant circuit. Reactive VA's
should be used in the calculations rather than simple resistive W values.

 In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
writes:

>
>One thing that's left out of this that indeed can be important in the
real
>world is mutual impedance between antenna elements and other items in the
>system, such as the feedline up to the balun.  It's seldom the case that
>the feedline runs away from an antenna along a path where mutual
couplings
>are exactly balanced...  Perhaps it's fair for this analysis to state
that
>as an assumption, but it is NOT fair to assume it without stating it.
>Also, we need to be wary of the assumption that our line has no delay
from
>ab to cd.  That may be fine in answering many of the questions that have
>come up, but it you aren't careful, you can end up asking a related
>question and lead yourself right to an incorrect answer because you
didn't
>include the propagation delay of the line.
>
Hi Tom,

Your correct, Zb should include the phase delay and some representation of
the transmission line impedance of the device, and the mutal coupling of
the line to the antenna aren't considered. But where do we stop?  The
actual transformer (balun) is more complicated than the entire "more true"
system representation, and so is the antenna and feedline system!

The picture is complicated, and this thread seems to seek solutions before
important basics or the overall picture is understood and considered, hi.
I can't keep up with sudden shifts to new areas before the old ones are
finished, it's like trying to design something without knowing important
parameters. So I'll go away with one prediction:

When it's all over and done, the best general solution will be an air core
link coupled tuner with a fully floating secondary, or by using the best
1:1 choke balun possible at the tuner output.

SK,
Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 95 18:15:41 GMT
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <454p06$[e-mail]> <45e6oo$[e-mail]> <45ff8r$[e-mail]> <45gp5b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:
><[e-mail]> wrote:

>>There are just two things that you can do about the common mode stuff -
>>1. provide a path for it to flow on, or 2. provide it a very high
>>impedance so that it has NO place to go. i.e. choke it.

>And my question was: Will a balanced 'T' transmatch, with independent
>control over the normally ganged capacitors, accomplish the above?

Cecil, I don't think it will.  If I'm correct, Don is saying that common
mode voltage/current must either be extremely well isolated from ground,
as with a balanced link tuner, or it must have a good path to ground so
it doesn't become excessive in the first place.  Of course, I'm not sure
I fully understand where the common mode stuff originates if the antenna
and line are symmetrical and balanced, but I'm still studying everything
that's been sent to me recently.

Anyway, Don's concept seems to agree with some interesting tests that Tom
(W8JI) mentioned to me in e-mail, as well as what I've seen so far in the
info that people have sent (one of which was the excellent piece from
Charlie Lofgren).  Personally, I'd be very surprised if unequal capacitors
can equalize the amplitude of the currents without shifting their phase,
i.e., the currents will still be unbalanced.  Then again, if the capacitors
accomplish this OK, I think they'll create unequal voltages on the line,
which translates to common mode voltage, which in turn may sacrifice the
performance of the balun if feedpoint impedances are high.  <sigh>

I can't answer your other questions with any authority, but I think 20%
current imbalance is excessive.  Seems to me that would mean 20% of the
current on the line is uncancelled and will radiate.  That's just an
educated guess though.  Like you, I'd be interested to know if it's a
true statement.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:58 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!castle.nando.net!news
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 12 Oct 1995 02:06:59 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <45ht83$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <451t62$[e-mail]> <453kc2$[e-mail]> <454p06$[e-mail]> <45e6oo$[e-mail]> <45ff8r$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1211.nando.net

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
> I just wanted to mention one more thing about this.  After reviewing the
> schematic of the Johnson Matchbox, there's no doubt it falls into category
> (1) above.
>
> If the tuned output link is split apart, the circuit resembles the
> symmetrical Pi or T that we've been discussing, *except the midpoint of
> the components is grounded*.  Looking from the transmitter towards the
> antenna, each side of the line has a tapped coil in series.  Next, there
> are two capacitors across the line, with their midpoint grounded.
> Following that, there are two capacitors in series with the line, and
> finally, two more capacitors across the feedpoint itself, with their
> midpoint grounded.
>
> Given the above, I just don't see what purpose the link coupling serves,
> at least from the standpoint of common mode currents and voltages.  I'll
> bet if someone built a symmetrical T or Pi tuner and referenced its
> midpoint to ground, it could be fed with a current balun (or maybe an
> isolation transformer) and would work just fine.  Of course, that would
> mean two coils and four capacitors for either a T or Pi, so I'm not sure
> anything is saved over the older link-coupled designs.
>
The output side of the Johnson Matchbox is just like a balanced parallel
tuned tank circuit.  One of the capacitors (the normal split stator one)
tunes the circuit to resonance.  The output terminals are 'tapped' onto
this tuned circuit to establish the output impedance match.  On many
tuners this is usually accomplished by tapping the antenna across a
portion of the coil.  The Matchbox accomplishes the tap across a
capacitive divider.  The neat thing about the Matchbox is that this
tap point is controlled by dual differential capacitors, and that
means that adjusting the tap point does not change the overall
capacity across the coil since the capacity of one section increases
while the other decreases - and the two are in series, so no overall
change in capacity.  It works in theory, and comes close in practice
with resistive loads within its range.  With reactive loads, there
will be somme interaction between the two controls.  This system
allows low-loss components and bandswitching at the same time.  The
tapped coil arrangement is difficult to bandswitch, and therefore is
usually implemented with plug-in coils or a bunch of taps and jumpers.

The link coupling allows an unbalanced input with the balanced output,
since the ground points on both sides are more or less independent.
you can ground one side of the input link and feed unbalanced while
the output can be grounded at the center for a balanced output.
(There are occasions where floating the balanced side provides better
results, but I'm not sure if this is an option for the Matchbox -
perhaps there is a strap on the back panel for this, I don't know)


73,
Don



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 20:59:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 12 Oct 1995 15:59:07 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45je0b$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <45ht83$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <45ht83$[e-mail]>, DB Wilhelm  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>The
>tapped coil arrangement is difficult to bandswitch, and therefore is
>usually implemented with plug-in coils or a bunch of taps and jumpers.

Is it difficult to switch because of the high voltages involved? I assume
it is a lot easier to bandswitch at QRP levels. How about 100w levels?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:00 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.uoregon.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 12 Oct 1995 17:02:19 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <45jhmr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-01.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
;
;  On a related topic, given the results of all these tuner tests, I'm
;  somewhat interested in the possibility of using toroids as the basis for
;  *tuned*, balanced output links.  This places greater stress on the cores,
;  although it doesn't require high permeability materials.  I suspect
;  permeabilities of 10 or less are appropriate.  The obvious advantages to
;  this approach are increased coefficient of coupling, reduction in external
;  magnetic fields, and reduced size.
;
;  Has anyone here ever performed the flux calculations on the powdered iron
;  cores?  I'm just wondering if this is a practical concept at 1KW power
;  levels?

I've only done the calculations for a limited number of applications. But one
thing you'll find is that powdered iron can take a whole lot more flux density
(around an order of magnitude more as I recall) than typical ferrites before
they saturate. Conceptually, this is because of all the "air gaps" between
iron particles, which are actually insulated from each other. So saturation
isn't a concern at HF or above.

I've used powdered-iron cores a number of times for HF antenna matching
circuits at power levels up to about 300 watts with no problem. I don't think
you can get the Q which you can with a big, air-core coil, but this doesn't
take into account actually putting the air-core coil into a box with other
components. If you choose the material and number of turns carefully, you can
get quite a respectable Q from powdered iron-cored inductors. I would expect
Tom, W8JI, to be an expert on this.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:01 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 16:18:33 GMT
References: <45h718$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 40

Cecil A. Moore -FT-~ ([e-mail]) wrote:

: My noticable problem may be mostly psychological. I'm worried about not
: knowing when to worry. :-) If my currents are 20% unbalanced, does that
: mean I radiate 2dB? 1dB? from the ladder-line?   20log(.8)~2dB

Depends on many things.  If the antenna feedpoint impedance is highly
reactive and the 20% current into the ladder line sees mostly a resistance
(assuming that resistance to represent radiation), you could be in deep
trouble; on the other hand, if the current into the feedline is all
reactive, then there is no radiation associated with it.  Also if this
current unbalances the current in the antenna itself, it can muck up the
pattern.

Someone has probably already stated this, it's so obvious -- but maybe it
bears repeating:

   If the antenna feedpoint impedance is high, you will have trouble
   getting a "current mode" or "choke mode" balun to work well, because to
   work well requires a high choke impedance which is not easy to get.

   If the antenna feedpoint impedance is low, a "current mode" balun should
   work quite well, because relatively little impedance is required to keep
   currents in the antenna and out of the balun.

   If you wish to feed a symmetrical, balanced, high-impedance antenna,
   you can transform the required high impedance balanced to ground,
   down to a low impedance still balanced to ground, with various
   symmetrical networks:  an "H" instead of a "T" or a "rectangle (??)"
   instead of a "PI".  These networks can transform a high symmetrical
   impedance down to a low impedance, still wishing to be symmetrical,
   but which is now easily fed from a "current mode" balun.  Or you can
   use a center-tapped tuned or untuned transformer:  a link-coupled
   symmetrical tuner, or a toroid transformer (e.g., 6*n turns, center
   tap grounded, fed at n turns from the center tap:  this gives a 50
   ohm to 1800 ohm transformation) Avoid highly reactive loads if at all
   possible, because the current times voltage can become much greater
   than the radiated power.

73, K7ITM


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 95 23:19:09 GMT
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <45ht83$[e-mail]> <45je0b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:

>Is it difficult to switch because of the high voltages involved?

Yes, and the switches have become almost impossible to find at any
reasonable price.

>I assume it is a lot easier to bandswitch at QRP levels. How about
>100w levels?

100W is not a problem, generally speaking.  BTW, Charlie Lofgren
mentioned something about this, relative to the simplified, single-coil
Z-match.  The inductor in that unit is wound on a T-200 toroid, and
Charlie says he's tried it at 100+ watts with no signs of heating.  The
limiting factor at that power level turned out to be the receiver-type
capacitors, which started arcing.  He didn't specifically mention the
switches, but thinking about it, even the old 100W boatanchors with
their huge parts didn't use especially large tank switches.

BTW, did you get my last e-mail reply?  Our server's acting up again.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 13 Oct 1995 05:54:17 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45ld09$[e-mail]>
References: <45h718$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45h718$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:

>My noticable problem may be mostly psychological. I'm worried about not
>knowing when to worry. :-) If my currents are 20% unbalanced, does that
>mean I radiate 2dB? 1dB? from the ladder-line?   20log(.8)~2dB
>
>73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
>
>

It now becomes a question of the radiation efficiency of the feedline. R
rad over Rloss referenced to the same point in the line. The simplistic
ansr is it will all eventually radiate, it just depends on if it radiates
as a "radio wave" or heat! Hi.

We need more data to tell how much power that could have been radiated by
the antenna has moved to the line. It seems to me the power will vary with
the radiation resistance of the feedline in a parallel mode, and the rad
res of the antenna, as well as the net current in each. I don't think I'm
missing anything.

That could all be cured with a good choke balun at the antenna terminals!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:04 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 13 Oct 1995 06:23:43 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 48
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45lenf$[e-mail]>
References: <45jhmr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45jhmr$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

>
>I've used powdered-iron cores a number of times for HF antenna matching
>circuits at power levels up to about 300 watts with no problem. I don't
think
>you can get the Q which you can with a big, air-core coil, but this
doesn't
>take into account actually putting the air-core coil into a box with
other
>components. If you choose the material and number of turns carefully, you
can
>get quite a respectable Q from powdered iron-cored inductors.

Hi Roy,

Single band resonant toroids are fine, and multi-band resonant toroid
systems are ok in low loaded Q applications if space is limited. But using
toroids at even moderate power levels in multi-band applications creates
huge problems.

In practical applications, toroids can't provide as high an unloaded Q as
air wound coils that are reasonably well mounted and dimensioned. Remember
efficiency directly relates to the ratio of unloaded Q to loaded Q, and
toroids don't usually "shine" in that department.

The coupling coefficient is pretty well dependent on the operating
(loaded) Q. Since system losses aren't usually from primary to secondary
flux leakage, I don't see any *electrical* advantage in using toroids.

The closed magnetic loop in the core creates big problems with switching.
The designer can't short unused turns to prevent unwanted resonances or
excessive voltage build-up on switch contacts. When unused turns aren't
shorted out on the higher bands, the remaining unused section becomes a
"step-up transformer". The switch will become a small Tesla coil
demonstration.

If the designer shorts the unused turns, the flux has no easy escape path.
The current (and heat) in the shorted winding will skyrocket. The toroid
system will now turn into a demonstration of a high current de-soldering
system!

A person might get away with Toroids at low power, or with low loaded Q's,
or on single band systems. But I don't see any advantage in multi-band
medium or high power systems.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:10 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!jupiter.planet.net!news.ia.net!news.sbt.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 95 23:20:32 GMT
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45h718$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) wrote:

>   If the antenna feedpoint impedance is low, a "current mode" balun
>should work quite well, because relatively little impedance is required to
>keep currents in the antenna and out of the balun.

Tom, I used to have an article that mentioned this condition as also
being a problem for the balun.  I can't seem to find it (I've tried
several times), but the author claimed that the cores in these baluns
tend to "disappear" as their upper frequency limit (30 MHz) is approached.
He went on to state that as that happens, the coupling through the core
is reduced, and the primary/secondary power is transferred on a basis that
is increasingly capacitive.

If this is true, then low impedance loads at higher frequencies would
certainly degrade the coefficient of coupling through the device.

Has anyone here ever tested for this effect?

>   If you wish to feed a symmetrical, balanced, high-impedance antenna,
>   you can transform the required high impedance balanced to ground,
>   down to a low impedance still balanced to ground, with various
>   symmetrical networks:  an "H" instead of a "T" or a "rectangle (??)"
>   instead of a "PI".  These networks can transform a high symmetrical
>   impedance down to a low impedance, still wishing to be symmetrical,
>   but which is now easily fed from a "current mode" balun.

Not to be argumentative <g>, but Tom, W8JI, has stated that making the
tuner symmetrical doesn't necessarily relieve the burden on the input
balun caused by common mode voltage/current.  I think there's more to
this situation than meets the eye, and I'm suspicious of the fact that
Johnson chose to ground the "midpoint" between the symmetrical components
in its Matchboxes.

This brings up another question. (Don, if you didn't seen this in my last
e-mail reply, our mail server's to blame).  I've noticed that some
balanced link-coupled tuners place the link at the input (like Johnson),
while others place it at the output.  Is there a general logic that
determines the configuration chosen by the designer?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:11 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!uunet!in2.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: FM antennas?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 01:10:09 GMT
Lines: 4

Who had the post about FM antennas? I saw the title but couldn't access
it. Perhaps there is a better use for slinkys after all.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 10 Oct 1995 20:31:28 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 16
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45el70$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
mike  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>       The 'dipole' wire elements are each 52.5 inchs long

Hi Mike, that's as good a length as any.

>       The twin lead matching section is 29.5 foot long

There is no matching section except on 20m. In one of the Antenna Compendiums,
G5RV, himself, advises feeding this antenna with ladder-line all the way to a
balanced antenna tuner. It is less expensive and less lossy to forget the coax.
The G5RV was designed for 20m. That it works on any other band is just a
coincidence.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.interlog.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!freenet2.freenet.ufl.edu!afn17891
From: "Thomas W. Castle" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 22:50:21 -0400
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet2.afn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>



On Tue, 10 Oct 1995, mike wrote:

>
> Can someone please confirm the following dimensions for me for the G5RV
> antenna. I plan on using one for 80 meters :
>
>       The 'dipole' wire elements are each 52.5 inchs long
>
>       The twin lead matching section is 29.5 foot long
>
> This is what some one gave me in a hurry, I simply want to confirm it.
>

Ok Mike... I built mine using the following dimensions:
The 52' wire length per side is a starting dimension. The
finished dimension is 51' per side 102' overall.
The raditor is made of <2> 51' pieces of #12 copper multi strand wire.
they are joined to the ends of a simple insulator <1" wide>.
this is also where you connect your 300ohm twin  downlead to each
of the #12 copper wires. the down lead should be 29' 6'' long of
300 ohm tv lead. You can then connect at least 70' of suitable
coax 50-52 ohm to run into you location. You also need to add
about 6 turns of the coax in a 1' to 1 & 1/2' circle which you will
tape so as to stay that configuration. This will make a current
balun per say... You then can check the SWR; It should be checked
at 14.150 Mhz without the use of a tuner. You do not change the
length of the #12 wire, instead you trim the twin lead where it
joins directly to the coax. Trim it in small increments until
you get 1.1 SWR and good SWR across the entire 20 meter band.
When finished adjusting; tape an seal the twin lead to coax
<shield to one side & center conductor to the other side of twin
lead> joint... This antenna info came off the assembly sheet of
a G5RV kit commercially sold. I will delete the rest of the info
since it pertains to saftey an hanging the antenna; which I am
hoping you already know...

De Tom a.k.a. KD4QHH



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:18 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 12 Oct 1995 12:16:43 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <45j0vb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45fepd$[e-mail]> <45gvmc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip243.dallas2.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:
>In article <45fepd$[e-mail]>,

>100-105 ft. is a reasonable compromise for 80m and 40m. It is better to have a
>medium SWR on all bands than to have a low SWR on one band and a high SWR on
>all the others. And remember, feeding a resonant half-wave dipole with 300 ohm
>ladder-line does not result in a low SWR. 300/50 ~ 6:1. Shortening the dipole
>to less than a half-wavelength on 80m actually reduces the SWR when using 300
>or 450 ohm ladder-line.
>

Well, I guess we disagree here.

Low SWR on the feedline is only minimally important when the antenna is fed with
high quality low loss ladder line -- or better yet, real live honest to goodness
open wire line, which from a practical standpoint can be considered as virtually
lossless in lengths used in the typical ham antenna installation.  Of course, you
must have a decent antenna matching unit with sufficient range to make your
transmitter happy -- but the primary objective is NOT to get the feedline SWR low.
You feed an antenna like this with low loss balanced line to minimize feedline
losses associated with high SWR.  If I want a perfect 1:1 match on the feedline, I
just switch my dummy load in the line, bypass my transmatch, and gloat with
satisfaction ... :-)

Further, the point of using a balun (better, use a balanced transmatch), is not to
achieve matching between the line impedance and 50 ohms in this case.  Nothing is
"matched" here, except that little piece of 50 ohm cable that connects from the
transmatch to the transmitter.  And even that is only necessary because the modern
transmitter has an output impedance artificially limited to a fixed value of 50
ohms, or at best a small range limited by those internal automatic antenna
"trimmers".

So, why cheat yourself with a short antenna on 80 to take the UNNECESSARY step of
reducing SWR on the feedline?  The desire for low feedline SWR is just an artifact
of many of us being so used to feeding everything with coaxial cable -- which
exhibits very lossy performance under mismatched conditions.

Regards .. Grant/NQ5T



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:19 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 12 Oct 1995 15:54:23 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45jdnf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45fepd$[e-mail]> <45gvmc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
Steve Ellington <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Also keep in mind that it will have some very sharp lobes up on the
>higher bands giving some gain but who knows where.

EZNEC knows where. Above 1.5WL, the radiation pattern is cloverleaf.

One other point. The purpose of keeping the SWR as low as possible is
not to avoid losses in the ladder-line. It is to limit the impedances
seen by the rest of the system to avoid losses in the transmatch/balun.

A 450 ohm ladder-line with an SWR of 20:1 could result in the balun
seeing 9000 ohms. I don't know of a balun or a transmatch that will
perform well looking into 9000 ohms even though the losses remain
relatively low on the ladder-line.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:20 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 12 Oct 1995 19:55:35 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <45jrrn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45fepd$[e-mail]> <45gvmc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <45jdnf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip58.dallas2.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]


>
>EZNEC knows where. Above 1.5WL, the radiation pattern is cloverleaf.

True -- and the further above 1.5WL, the messier it gets and the closer the major
lobes approach an end-fire pattern.

>One other point. The purpose of keeping the SWR as low as possible is
>not to avoid losses in the ladder-line. It is to limit the impedances
>seen by the rest of the system to avoid losses in the transmatch/balun.
>

Well, its a bit of both, I think.  But all of these issues aside,  the basic 'cut
for 80' multiband dipole always seems to work well.  And I've never had any trouble
with one on 40 meters, loading or radiating or heating up baluns or transmatches.

Alternatively, the 100-104' (ie, G5RV sized) flat top is a lousy performer on 15 in
my (and others) experience -- which you could argue doesn't matter much since 15
will be dead and buried most of the time until Sol improves his spots.

What this all proves, if anything, is that when it comes to SIMPLE multi-band
antennas, there aren't any free lunches or ideal solutions. If only there were an
inexpensive, lightweight, backpackable 1.8-30MHz Log Periodic....

Regards ...

Grant/NQ5T





From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:21 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 13 Oct 1995 06:08:34 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45ldr2$[e-mail]>
References: <45j0vb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45j0vb$[e-mail]>, Grant Youngman
<[e-mail]> writes:

>
>>100-105 ft. is a reasonable compromise for 80m and 40m. It is better to
have
>a
>>medium SWR on all bands than to have a low SWR on one band and a high
SWR on
>>all the others. And remember, feeding a resonant half-wave dipole with
300
>ohm
>>ladder-line does not result in a low SWR. 300/50 ~ 6:1. Shortening the
>dipole
>>to less than a half-wavelength on 80m actually reduces the SWR when
using
>300
>>or 450 ohm ladder-line.

That's right!

I wrote a manual for someone that sells a G5RV, and so I had to measure
the feedpoint impedance. At 45 feet above plain earth (2mS/M) the
feedpoint impedance (at the end of the ladder line) was 17 ohms -j0 at
3.55 MHz, 80 ohms -j0 at 7.35 Mhz, 108 ohms -j0) at 14.180.

The SWR was really pretty good on those three popular bands NEAR the
resonant ends of the bands! The BW is narrower than a regular dipole on
all bands, and the impedance was not so good (but it was "matchable" with
a cheap tuner) on all the other bands, except 15 meters. If the 50 ohm
line is kept short it isn't all that bad an antenna. And you don't have
the headaches of running ladder line in the shack.

I'm sure laddr line would be better, but you would still likely need to
fuss with it a bit even with a Johnson Matchbox.  A lower Z open wire line
would help, as would avoiding a 1/4 wl line on the lowest band when using
a half wave element.

 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:22 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ddi2.digital.net!usenet
From: cllane
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: GAP Antenna Info
Date: 13 Oct 1995 04:20:10 GMT
Organization: Florida Online
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <45kpdq$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: @pm2_10.digital.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6

Looking for info on GAP Antennas?
Give them a call or drop them a note. They will be glad to answer any
questions you may have.  Their address is as follows:

GAP Antenna Products
6010 N. Old Dixie Hwy.
Vero Beach, Fl  32967

Tel# [phone]
Fax# [phone]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:23 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger A. Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ham Sites WANTED !!!
Date: 11 Oct 1995 02:39:33 GMT
Organization: Telex Communications, Inc.
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <45fap5$3li$[e-mail]>
References: <45dabk$[e-mail]>

You might try  ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC for antenna
software.  ARRL now has a WEB site at http://www.arrl.org.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:24 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!pendragon.jsc.nasa.gov!ames!titan.ksc.nasa.gov!kscdl1.cad.ksc.nasa.gov!k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov!user
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hamstick Mobile Antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 13:37:35 -0400
References: <45m2pu$[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Nntp-Posting-Host: k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov
Lines: 17

In article <45m2pu$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
> I recently installed a 20 meter Hamstick on my truck. Results are good
but I'm bothered
> about the swr/freq bandwidth. It seems too broad! It appears that this
antenna has
> a lower "Q" than my Webster bandspanner. Is it less efficient because of
this?

Tony-

I noticed the same thing between a 75 Meter Hamstick, and the Hustler
antenna with 75 Meter low power resonator.  I expect that the Hamstick is
slightly less efficient.  However, the difference in signal, is probably
too small to notice, maybe a dB or two.  (It takes 6 dB to change one
S-Unit.)

73, Fred, K4DII


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:25 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!zilch0
From: [e-mail] (Michael K. Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried the  DISCONE in 73 MAG ??
Date: 13 Oct 1995 06:44:06 GMT
Organization: Primenet [phone]
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <45l1rm$[e-mail]>
References: <459jl9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr5.primenet.com
NNTP-Posting-User: zilch0
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

DedElvis01 ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I read the article and was wondering if anyone has gotten it to work. I am
: in the 10 meter band and need a small antenna for dx work, when possible.
: If anyone has any advice on a discone, please reply.

Hi:
        That is not a discone.  I have not renewed my subscription to 73
because of that article.  Wayne needs a real technical editor to sift out
the garbage.

        If you would like to construct a discone, you should borrow/buy a
copy of*The ARRL Antenna Book*, 16th or 17th edition, Chapter 7, page 17
under *The HF Discone Antenna*.

        When you've read through all the formulae they give for
calculating the dimensions of the cone and disc radials and the very
critical hub dimensions, your head will be swimming -- mine was anyway.
Just ask and I'll e-mail you a copy of an MS-DOS program I wrote that does
all the calculations for you using the formulae in that article.  It's
very crude, but does all the math that article covers plus it gives you
construction-related figures like the center-to-center distances between
disc radials around a hub of a calculated diameter and circumference.

        The help file that comes with it makes it clear that you won't
understand the output of the program without reading the article.  I just
didn't bother to replicate all the material that is so well covered in
the book.  I use all the same variable names, so you won't know
what's what without the article.

        Let me know if you'd like a copy -- no charge.

/---------------------\
 Michael K Davis,AB6SL
  [e-mail] A
  MIME Attachments OK
\---------------------/


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:26 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!lager
From: [e-mail] (Woody Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help! Need Silver Plated SO-239
Date: 12 Oct 1995 15:57:00 GMT
Organization: Primenet [phone]
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <45jdsc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr1.primenet.com
NNTP-Posting-User: lager
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I want to build the 800MHz antenna that is described in the November
Popular Electronics, but cannot find a source for silver plated panel
mount SO-239 connectors. Lots of places have nickel plated connectors but
of the 6 or so shops I called none carry the part. Help!

Woody - KC7???

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.primenet.com/~lager



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:27 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gate.net!news-adm
From: [e-mail] (Claudio Leiva)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: help, TH3 conversion  to 12,17.30 M
Date: 13 Oct 1995 00:36:23 GMT
Organization: CyberGate, Inc.
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <45kca7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: miafl2-16.gate.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11

Does anyone have any ideas on the conversion of the
TH3MKS to the WARC bands? Would I need to retune the
traps? or would stretching the elements be enough?

I have some ability on antenna design, but any advise
would be greatly appreciated.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.scott.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!news.mindlink.net!van-bc!news.rmii.com!nexus.interealm.com!root
From: "George J. Molnar" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help-Marine Base Antenna
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 08:09:58 -0600
Organization: ICG/MagNET [phone]
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45809p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp205.interealm.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b1 (Windows; I; 32bit)

Yes, pretty much any omnidirectional 2m antenna will work fine
on the marine band (and vice-versa). You will need to tune the
antenna for the slightly higher frequencies, but this should not
be any problem, if you are careful. Good antennas include the
Ringo Ranger, any quality discone and any 5/8 or 1/4 wave
groundplanes. Avoid directional antennas (beams), as they are
somewhat narrower in response, and will likely not provide good
gain or directivity at marine freqs.

73,
George, KF2T/0


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:29 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!bcm.tmc.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!simtel!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!uunet!in2.uu.net!elvis.delphi.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF on Jeep Cherokee
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 00:02:17 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3sajkb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <44iajo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Curt Phillips <[e-mail]>

Here's what I do:

I use one of the "screwdriver" type HF mobile antennas.  Works
great,
best of many I've used over the years.  You can buy (or make) a
wide
variety of mounts for them, including an extended height one
that
bolts right onto the trailer hitch.  That makes the mast taller
and puts
the center-loading coil higher up, which improves performance
notably.  Works good and leaves no holes, marks, etc., to worry
about repairing before turning in the vehicle.

73, Mike KB3RG


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!titan.ksc.nasa.gov!kscdl1.cad.ksc.nasa.gov!k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov!user
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do I tune the SWR on a dual band antenna?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 17:58:59 -0400
References: <45m9eb$[e-mail]>
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Nntp-Posting-Host: k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov
Lines: 41

In article <45m9eb$[e-mail]>, Bobby Brake
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> I am just getting into HAM and I've just installed a mobile
> 2m/70cm dual band LARSEN antenna on my car. When I
> communicate, everyone tell me that there is a lot of noise
> and that I need to check my SWR and tune it.

Bobby-

There is no easy adjustment for a Larsen 2/70 dual band antenna.

I have had two of the NLA 2/70 antennas.  Both were tuned well above Two
Meters, and had high SWR.  When I recently tried to buy a new one, I was
told that the NLA version had been discontinued, and only the NMO version
was available.

I bought the NMO version, and when I tried it, I found that the tuning was
centered on Two Meters with a very good SWR.  I also found that the same
element that was a problem on the old coil, worked like the new element on
the new coil.  (Apparently, the coil is where the problem is on the older
NLA version.)

Is yours the NLA or the NMO version?  If it is new, and is the NLA
version, you may be able to exchange it for the NMO version.  If it is
already the NMO version, you may have some other problem like a poor
connection.

I don't know of a way to check SWR without a meter.  However, most
transmitters have some kind of SWR protection circuit.  If power output is
normal, you can assume that SWR is not too bad.

Even with my high SWR, I didn't have any trouble with noise.  Other things
can also cause noise.  Sometimes a radio can have an inadvertent error of
5 KHz in its frequency setting, that will cause noise.  Sometimes the
radio can be set to low power by mistake.

Sometimes a repeater has noise that doesn't show up on stations that are
close. You might try several other repeaters to verify that the problem is
yours and not theirs!

73, Fred, K4DII


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:31 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!gossip.pyramid.com!olivea!venus.sun.com!cs.utexas.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!VAX.SONOMA.EDU!harrisok
From: Ken Harrison <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: jpole simplified
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 23:44:56 PDT
Organization: Information Resources and Technology
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <44snhu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vax.sonoma.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <44snhu$[e-mail]>

On 4 Oct 1995, James Janota wrote:

>
>
> --
>
> James Janota
> [e-mail]
>
>
>

Can't get much simpler than that...  ;-)

__________________________________________________________________________
Ken Harrison   ---   [e-mail]   ---   Amateur Radio:  N6MHG
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~













From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!newshost.comco.com!news1.cris.com!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.cerf.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!news.trw.com!news2.trw.com!alpha.nafb.trw.com!sysadmin
From: Wayne Price <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking for SMALL BEAM antenna
Date: 11 Oct 1995 15:42:44 GMT
Organization: Center for Advanced Hindsight
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <45golk$[e-mail]>
References: <459jkl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sp369
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

This is difficult to answer without knowing the frequency of interest,
how much space do you have, and whether it is indoors or outdoors.
However, rising to the challenge, I offer the following comments for HF
bands above 40 meters.

Butternut makes a compact multiband beam that has gotten mixed reviews.

An 8JK two element is an excellent compact beam.  If memory serves me
correctly, it can be 3/4 the length of a full sized element at the lowest
frequency of operation. This makes it about 27 feet long on 20 meters.  I
am not aware of a commercial version, so construction details will have
to come from books.

Indoors, wire beams can be suspended from the ceiling.  See antenna
books, and use your imagination.  Practically any antenna made from
tubing can be duplicated with wire and imagination.

Watch out for the ends of indoor antennas.  From personal experience, I
know that they can set curtains with metallic thread on fire.

--Wayne   W5GIE in Redlands, CA

[e-mail] (DedElvis01) wrote:
>I live in a small apartment and I am interested in building a small beam
>antrenna. I am open to any suggestions. Horizontal or vertical, doesn't
>matter, just lookinmg for a little better performance than a dipole can
>offer. Thanks.




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.netrail.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!storm.atms.purdue.edu!bap
From: BRETSKI <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: More antenna fun.
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 09:45:23 -0500
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: storm.atms.purdue.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:20353 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11055 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16421


This time it was the 2 meter portable groundplane on page 20.59
of the ARRL Handbook for 1995. I sure do like this book.
The lesson I learned from this experience was to listen to
my elders or is that Elmers. :-)

He says to make sure to use a soldering iron that will go at least
700+ degrees F.

That's what he means.

My 100 watter crapped out last night so I tried to use my puny
pencil iron. Even after leaving it on the wire and solder for a long
time it still wasn't hot enough.

I even used a candle flame to heat the copper but the solder would
not melt. :-(

So I brought the thing in this AM to work and used our iron which
goes to 850+ F. That did a GREAT job. It all flowed together
nicely.

If we learn from our mistakes, then I am a genius.

See ya.
73 de N9ZFF


BRET A. PENNINGTON /  COMPUTER TECHNICIAN   /EARTH AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
CIVL 4252 317-494-0678 / PURDUE UNIVERSITY  / WEST LAFAYETTE, INDIANA 47907
[e-mail]                   /     speaking only for myself.
/\/\/\/\/\/ __... /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ N9ZFF /\/\/\/\/\/ ...__ /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need design for helical wound 40 meter vertical
Date: 12 Oct 1995 20:18:34 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45jt6q$[e-mail]>
References: <45i89a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <45i89a$[e-mail]>,
Michael A. Fallavollita, Ph.D. <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Does anyone know where I can find a good design for a helical 40 meter
>vertical?

Hi Mike, IMO, as long a whip as you can manage with a hi-Q center-loading
coil would perform much better than the low-Q design you are considering.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:35 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!news.tamu.edu!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need design for helical wound 40 meter vertical
Date: 12 Oct 1995 21:59:10 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <45k33e$[e-mail]>
References: <45i89a$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.194.44.210
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <45i89a$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael A. Fallavollita, Ph.D.) writes:
>Does anyone know where I can find a good design for a helical 40 meter
>vertical?  I'm thinking of something wound on a piece of PVC.  I thought
>this would be a good antenna to use from my boat since I have salt water
>for a ground plane and it wouldn't require much space.  It would also be
>portable enough to use mobile with a QRP rig.
>
>Any pointers would be appreciated.
>
>       -- Mike Fallavollita
>          KE6FWK
>          [e-mail]
>

I tried this back in 1974 or so.  It worked rotten.  Later I found out that there
are several different compounds that are used in plastic pipe.  It is rumored
that if you use some of them, the losses skyrocket and you wind up being
an unhappy camper!

Years later, somewhere I think I read that if you chunk a piece of the stuff
you want to use into a microwave and it gets hot, you know not to use that
particular material.

When I built mine, I just started out with a quarter wave long chunk of wire,
wound it up over the full length of the pole I had, then started snipping off
wire and so on until it got reasonant the way I wanted it.  Real cut and try.

Since it worked poorly over my lossy form, I gave up without returning for
more experiments.  However, if you use a good bamboo pole, a fiberglass pole
such as a pole vault pole reject, or something tht really is a good form, you
should be OK.  I figured out you pick the pole, wind wire on it to suit for test
then when you get it down to where you want it, to do it all up with bond
sealant to keep it in place and, poof, you're in!

Mike W5WQN as a guest at [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!interactive.net!winternet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!ames!olivea!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need design for helical wound 40 meter vertical
Date: 13 Oct 1995 00:11:52 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <45kas8$[e-mail]>
References: <45i89a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs3-13.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]

Mike -

I think the April '92 CQ covered helical wound verticals, but I
am unable to locate a copy.

If you come up with anything, I would appreciate your
forwarding a copy to me via e-mail

Thanks & 73

Joe - KW1K
==============
[e-mail] (Michael A. Fallavollita, Ph.D.) wrote:
>Does anyone know where I can find a good design for a helical 40 meter
>vertical?  I'm thinking of something wound on a piece of PVC.  I thought
>this would be a good antenna to use from my boat since I have salt water
>for a ground plane and it wouldn't require much space.  It would also be
>portable enough to use mobile with a QRP rig.
>
>Any pointers would be appreciated.
>
>       -- Mike Fallavollita
>          KE6FWK
>          [e-mail]
>




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (fiscon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: need info re: receiving antennas
Date: 11 Oct 1995 18:55:02 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <45h3u6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-atl8-28.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Oct 11 11:55:02 AM PDT 1995

I am planning to add a seperate receiver to my ham station and would
like to have a seperate receiving antenna. Would a simple long wire
with a variable capacitor at the receiver work well?What value
capacitor? Could I scale down a wire log periodic for general coverage
use? If I use a simple dipole would I want to use one with as much
length as possible? How would I tune it?How about a terminated
dipole(50 or 75 ohm resistor at each end)?
I know these questions seem simple. I am leaving out a lot of details.
I am using a remote antenna tuner for my transceiver. I want to use a
seperate antenna because I think I can get better general coverage with
a seperate antenna.


            Thanks In Advance,
            Dave Panek KE4MLV


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Q: Water in the coax
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 00:41:30 GMT
Lines: 7

 The good news is that it will improve the VSWR measured at the
: transmitter end of the line and make the unaware operator think that
: things have actually improved :-)

Wet coax is highly recommended for the G5RV.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.netrail.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!msunews!netnews.upenn.edu!Lehigh.EDU!Lehigh.EDU!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R5 or R7
Date: 11 Oct 1995 13:25:21 -0400
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <45gum1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ns3-1.cc.lehigh.edu

In article <45bvto$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jen Wood) writes:
>I am thinking of buying a R5 or R7 vertical antenna.  If anyone out there
>has one, or has had one, could you please tell me what you thought of it,
>like the pros and cons of it.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Harold Wood
>VE6 HFW
>woodm@cadvision

I have used the R5 since it came out. Actually I bought the R4 and later
converted it to the R5. I spoke with the Cushcraft Tech support people before
I picked it up and I was particulary interested in mounting techniques. I took
their advice and I mounted it about 15 ft above ground. After setting 20 meter
section length for cw end, all swr was as predicted by their charts. I live
northwest of Philadelphia. Given the lousy A Index and flux conditions of the
last several years, I have been quite successfull with a TS830S barefoot. For
example, I was able to complete DXCC Mixed with adding 45 Countries since
April of 1990. I have worked Reunion with good reports when the Flux Level was
83 and the A index was running 12.

I have had nothing but good success bare foot and you must remember that your
results will be a function of soil conditions and other environmental
structures ( I have a large line of tall pines next to my installation and I
live in a high housing density area.)

Good Luck and 73's    Dick K8WHA
>


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:40 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!lager
From: [e-mail] (Woody Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 12 Oct 1995 17:40:46 GMT
Organization: Primenet [phone]
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <45jjuu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr6.primenet.com
NNTP-Posting-User: lager
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16463 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11078

Ok, here's a newbie question for today.

The November 1995 Popular Electronics has a pretty neat project I want to
build. The project is a 1/4 wave ground plane antenna. The main component
in the antenna is an SO-239 panel mount connector. The author of the
article claims that the connector must be silver plated as nickel plating
will not work. Why? I am having a devil of a time finding silver plated
SO-239 connectors in Phoenix, but can get nickel plated for $5.00 at
Radio Shack. The author does not explain why he feels that only silver
will work and I have no clue. Thanks in advance for any help.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.primenet.com/~lager



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in2.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!primenet
From: [e-mail] (John S. Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 03:44:05 GMT
Organization: Department of Redundancy Dept.
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <45kn77$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip170.msp.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16465 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11080

>The author of the article claims that the connector must be silver
>plated as nickel plating will not work. Why?

Good question. The silver version would be easier to solder to. I
would say, make sure the dialectric inside was Teflon as the connector
will probably get fairly hot during soldering and Teflon doesn't melt
too easy. Often but not always, you can only get Teflon dialectric
SO-239's if you buy the silver plated ones. 73, John




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45ljcm$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 17:20:40 GMT
Lines: 27
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16472 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11083

In article <45ljcm$[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
>>The main component
>>in the antenna is an SO-239 panel mount connector. The author of the
>>article claims that the connector must be silver plated as nickel plating
>>will not work. Why? I
>
>Quite simply the answer is, that the author does not know, what he is
>talking about. Surely the silver plated connector has less loss, but the
>major concern is the plug that will mate with the connector. Unless you know
>pretty well how to do it, there is only little chance to mount the cable to
>the plug without substantial losses.

Actually, the author is probably concerned that the nickel plated
chassis fitting won't take solder well in the flange holes (for
the groundplane elements). Nickel plate is a pain in the a** to
get to take solder. Silver, OTOH, takes solder nicely.

However, if all you can find is nickel plated fittings, all is not
lost. Just file that blankety-blank plating off and the brass underneath
will take solder easily.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!jupiter.planet.net!news.ia.net!news.sbt.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!mkeitz
From: [e-mail] (Mike Keitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 15:57:11 GMT
Organization: TSE Systems
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <45m24i$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45ljcm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mkeitz.beve.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16476 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11089

In article <45ljcm$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] () wrote:
>>The main component
>>in the antenna is an SO-239 panel mount connector. The author of the
>>article claims that the connector must be silver plated as nickel plating
>>will not work. Why? I
>
>
>Hi,
>
>Quite simply the answer is, that the author does not know, what he is
>talking about. Surely the silver plated connector has less loss, but the
>major concern is the plug that will mate with the connector. Unless you
know
>pretty well how to do it, there is only little chance to mount the cable
to
>the plug without substantial losses.
>
>My suggestion is to ise a N-typt connector if the cable is thick (RG213)
>or a BNC connector, if the cable is thinn enough.

Absolutely.  239-type connectors are not too good at either maintaining a
good connection or handling high frequencies.  Their only "advantage" is
low cost.  Especially at 800 MHz, N or BNC connectors should be used,
depending on the size of the cable to be used (which should be large if it
is more than a few feet long).

If this is one of those 1/4 wave pyramid-like antennas, the author probably
specified a silver connector because it is easier to solder the radial
wires on.  A connector with a Teflon center insulator is pretty much
essential for this as well as the other plastics tend to melt under
moderate heat.  The least expensive (Radio Shack grade) connectors are made
of plated zinc or brass; if you file the plating off the base metal
underneath can be soldered, but there may be problems with the insulator
melting.  Some of the mid-grade ones are nickel (or stainless?) throughout
and difficult to solder, even if filed.  The author may have had a bad
experience with one of those.  Silver or gold plated connectors are easiest
to solder and usually have the Teflon insulator.  Since an 800 MHz 1/4 wave
antenna is quite small, a gold-plated SMA may be a viable choice.

When soldering the radials on, it works best to heat the connector up first
and tin it, flowing solder around and through the holes.  Even with a
Teflon insulator, be careful not to overheat it.  A 100 Watt solder gun is
barely adequate.  If you use a torch do it carefully, keeping the flame
only on the flange of the connector and not the center where it could
damage the insulator.  After the connector is prepared, tin the ends of the
radial wires.  Then re-melt the solder on the connector one hole at a time
and join the radials on.  Careful heating is again required so only one
corner of the connector is hot enough to melt, but at the same time the
joint is not 'cold'.  If that seems impossible to do, some sort of jig
could be built to hold the radial wires in place while all the solder is
melted.

If the antenna is to be used outdoors, be sure to seal up the top side of
the connector (unless you have found a hermetically sealed military one)
and cable attachment to keep water out.  Silicone sealant should work for
this, though it may detune the antenna slightly.  It's also a good idea to
remove all solder flux before sealing.

This is probably entirely too many words about such a simple subject.  At
the same time, I've undoubtably left out much essential information.  Do I
qualify to write a magazine article yet?

-Mike KD4QDM


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!elvis.delphi.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!wdr
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Swamp-Castle Press, Boston
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45ljcm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 22:06:06 GMT
Lines: 33
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16478 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11091

In article <[e-mail]>,
Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>The main component
> >>in the antenna is an SO-239 panel mount connector. The author of the
> >>article claims that the connector must be silver plated as nickel plating
> >>will not work. Why? I

> Actually, the author is probably concerned that the nickel plated
> chassis fitting won't take solder well in the flange holes (for

I've seen other versions of the article (the same antenna plan has been
published in *every* electronics magazine I've looked at sometime in the
last 6 months), the "author" recommends little nuts & bolts through the
flange holes to attach the ground-plane elements.  Gary's suggestion of
scraping down to brass sounds better if you don't plan to give it routine
maintenance...

The Radioshack antenna book has a tri-band version of this groundplane; it
hangs two L-shaped hooks on the main radiator to tune it to two other bands
(one at the base and another at a "node" up the main radiator).

I was thinking of trying one of these but replacing the ground-radials with
a miniature actual ground plane.  I've got a bulkhead BNC feedthrough that
I'm going to install in a pie-plate.  The pie-plat won't be a tuned
ground-wire, but it also won't poke me & will provide better near-field
shielding: I'm going to mount it on a pack-frame (with an adjustable lift)
for either/both/one-each my HT and cell-phone.  I got the idea from
someone who said they used a magmount rubber-ducky antenna on the
dinning room table with a pie-plate.

--
Bill Ricker, The Swamp-Castle Press    "The freedom of the press belongs
[e-mail]      N1VUX            to those who own one."--A.J.Lieberman


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!usenet.cis.ufl.edu!caen!ranecurl
From: [e-mail] (Rane Curl)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 13 Oct 1995 22:35:07 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <45mpir$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45ljcm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16479 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11092

In article <[e-mail]>,
Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> wrote:
[...snips...]
>However, if all you can find is nickel plated fittings, all is not
>lost. Just file that blankety-blank plating off and the brass underneath
>will take solder easily.

I take a 100W iron and acid flux to the nickel plated connectors and
tin them in advance, where I want to solder them later. This works
quite well with plugs too - tin the whole interior where the braid will be
soldered. You might want to connect the mating fitting to hold the
pin/socket in place, if the dielectric is not teflon. [I have another
trick for plugs, but this isn't the place...]

Rane Curl       N8REG



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:47 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.netrail.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-ulm.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 13 Oct 1995 11:43:18 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <45ljcm$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16480 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11093

>The main component
>in the antenna is an SO-239 panel mount connector. The author of the
>article claims that the connector must be silver plated as nickel plating
>will not work. Why? I


Hi,

Quite simply the answer is, that the author does not know, what he is
talking about. Surely the silver plated connector has less loss, but the
major concern is the plug that will mate with the connector. Unless you know
pretty well how to do it, there is only little chance to mount the cable to
the plug without substantial losses.

My suggestion is to ise a N-typt connector if the cable is thick (RG213)
or a BNC connector, if the cable is thinn enough.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!news.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Dalayr W. Hight)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Smith Charts
Date: 11 Oct 1995 08:40:57 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

I there any software out there freeware or comercial that can be used
for antenna or tranmission line analysis.  I need something to predict
radiation patterns, shading effects, multipath effects etc..

--
Dalayr W. Hight                           Internet: [e-mail]
746 TS/TGGDC (Research & Development)           or: [e-mail]
1644 Vandergrift Road
Holloman AFB NM 88330-7850                    Home: [e-mail]


+===========================================================================+
|TFT:  For God so loved the World that he gave his one and only Son, that   |
|      whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.      |
|                                                                John 3:16  |
+===========================================================================+


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!elvis.delphi.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Niklas Hiis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: subscribe
Date: 10 Oct 95 20:39:03 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

subscribe



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TH6 Info Needed
Date: 11 Oct 1995 01:29:55 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <45f6mj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite46.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

I recently acquired a Hygain TH6 (not sure if it's DXX) and I am
looking for a copy of the manual or other info.

I will gladly pay copy and mailing costs.

73, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:50 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!news-server.ncren.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!pen.k12.va.us!clowery
From: [e-mail] (Charles D. Lowery)
Subject: Tower Help!!!!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 20:13:40 GMT
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network
Lines: 13

I am erecting a Rohn 64 foot self supporting tower and need
some information.  I used to have only a A3 tribander on top at
the last QTH but want to stack the A3, a 6 element six meter
beam, a 11 element 2 meter beam, and a 10 element 440 beam on
top.
The A3 and 6 meter beams are horizontal and the 2 meter and 440
beams are vertical.  I have a 2" thick wall aluminum mast for
support on the HD73 rotor.  The rotop sets about six feet
inside the tower leaving about 9 feet to work with above the
tower for the antennas.  Is this enough and what spacing will
allow for the least interaction?
Thanks Charles Lowery AB4YR South Boston, VA



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:51 1995
From: [e-mail] (David Covert)
Subject: Tracker plans...
Date: 13 Oct 95 21:05:57 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: TheMicrosoftNetwork(msn.com)
Lines: 7


Can anyone point me towards a good homebrew satellite antenna tracker?
I think I can come up with the driver circuits, but the construction
materials and techniques elude me.

73's
Dave Covert, KB5GOG


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!news1.best.com!news3.net99.net!news.cais.net!news.cais.com!news
From: Lewis Cheek <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TRAPS
Date: 10 Oct 1995 23:44:52 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <45f0hk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pin161.ahoynet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)

Anyone know of a source of traps that I can use to construct an 80/40
meter dipole with ?  Need to be able to handle full power.

&3's Lew




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:53 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-ulm.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals...
Date: 11 Oct 1995 11:22:21 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <45g9dd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>The total length(with coils) of the antenna is 20meter.
>
>the length for coil-1 is aprox 7.5 meter
>the length for coil-2 is aprox 6.5 meter
>
>Mine question is how big/ what is the value for the coils?

The length of wire you use for making the coils has not *directly*
an effect on the current distribution. What determines the self inductance
is the number of turns, spacing, diameter...., there are formulas.
One coil at the bottom and one at the top is not a good idea,
try a centerloaded whip for (80and 40), but you will have to change the
coils when you change bands and you *need* a ground plane. there may be some
designs for multiband verticals around, but I would not put too much faith
in them.

73, Moritz DL5UH



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!news3.noc.netcom.net!ix.netcom.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What are adaptive antennas?
Date: 11 Oct 1995 19:59:38 -0700
Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712,714-638-4133,805-294-9338)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45h7fj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com

In article <45h7fj$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (lee davis) wrote:
> In searching topics associtated with base stations for
> wireless phone systems, many citations were listed associated
> with "adaptive antennas".  I would like a simple explanation
> of what an adaptive antenna is and why they are used.
>
>                        Regards,
>                        Lee Davis
>

An adaptive antenna system consists of multiple receiving antennas.  The
phases and gains of these individual antennas are adjusted before their
signals are combined to form nulls and peaks in the desired directions.
The phases and gains are control electronically and dynamically to
adaptive the antenna system to changing environment.  They are used
to pick out desired signal from unwanted signals.


73,

---
Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:55 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.us.world.net!ns2.mainstreet.net!bug.rahul.net!a2i!genmagic!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help arrl antenna handbook"
Date: 12 Oct 95 08:49:41 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "arrl" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:55 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help on hygain thx jr  tri-band"
Date: 11 Oct 95 07:57:35 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "on" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 13 21:00:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with 448mhz beam construction.."
Date: 12 Oct 95 15:11:36 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:31 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: "Reactive current"
Date: 17 Oct 1995 01:19:53 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <45v0bp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx10-58.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

I've gotten a surprising amount of email as a result of my statement that
there's no such thing as current (which was called "reactive current")
which doesn't radiate when flowing on a conductor. That current flowing on
a conductor will create a field is fundamental to electromagnetic theory,
and is quantitatively expressed by Maxwell's equations.

Let me present a simple example. It doesn't go beyond freshman circuit
analysis in scope.

Suppose we have a resonant, lossless antenna with feedpoint impedance 37 +
j0 ohms. Connect a 37 volt RMS source to it.

        Q1. What's the magnitude of the current flowing into the feedpoint?

          A1. 1 amp RMS.

        Q2. How much of the current is "reactive current"?

          A2. I'll leave this to you. I maintain there's no such thing.

        Q3. How much power is being delivered by the source?

          A3. 37 watts.

        Q4. What's the power radiated by the antenna?

          A4. 37 watts.

Now, put an inductor with reactance of 370 ohms in series with the antenna.
Increase the source voltage to 371.8 volts RMS. Now the current is 0.0995 -
j0.995 amps = 1 /_ -84.3 degrees.

        Q5. What's the magnitude of the current flowing into the feedpoint?

          A5. 1 amp RMS.

        Q6. How much of the current is "reactive current"?

          A6. Your turn again.

        Q7. How much power is being delivered by the source?

          A7. 37 watts.

        Q8. What's the power radiated by the antenna?

          A8. 37 watts.

(If you got the wrong answer of 0.366 watts for A7 or A8, calculate the
power using P = Re(VI*), where V is the voltage across the antenna
terminals (371.8 + j0) and I* is 0.0995 + j0.995.)

If the -j0.995 amps isn't what's being called "reactive current", then I'd
appreciate it if someone would present a simple circuit which shows what it
is supposed to be.

One more exercise. Let's choose a different time for "time zero".
Hopefully, our choice of when to call zero won't change steady-state power
dissipation. I'll choose "time zero" so that the source voltage is now
371.8 /_ 90 degrees. The current is now 0.995 + j 0.0995, or 1 /_ 5.7
degrees. Have I magically turned "reactive amps" into "real amps"? Source
power, antenna current, and radiated power haven't changed (which they'd
better not!)

The fact is, the current just doesn't care what you call zero time or
phase. Good thing, too.

What I've presented here is very simple circuit analysis. I hope that
people with other points of view can also express them in simple terms and
not have to invoke esoteric principles. Or perhaps "reactive current" is a
much more complicated concept than I thought.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newshub1.wanet.net!ucsnews!newshub.sdsu.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (David Gillahan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 15 Oct 95 20:19:30 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

unsubscribe

--
 ___________________________________________________________________________
( Take it easy.  -Dave                        The Upper Penninsula:         )
(                                               It's too cold, snows too    )
( Michigan Technological University             much, and it takes too long )
( The professional, perpetual student           long to get here. But hey,  )
( [e-mail]                              the air's fresh, and the    )
( kb8por@w8yy.#upmi.mi.usa.na                   water's clean. Works for me!)
(___________________________________________________________________________)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!relay-2.mail.demon.net
From: Dick G0BPS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: **New Antenna Book**
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 15:15:17 GMT
Organization: Myorganisation
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: relay-2.mail.demon.net
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

Hi Gang.  Look out for a new UK book on simple antennas
Called "Pascoe's Penny Pinchers" it is a re-write of the
collection of articles from Practical wireless by
Dick Pascoe G0BPS. Aimed at the novice antenna builder
it shows how to build wire antennas "for pence not pounds"
Cost in UK is 4.95 + 1 UKP p/p
DX $10 inc shipping. Email me if interested.
--
*******************************************
*                                         *
*     comment from "expert" gardener      *
*     weeds are only plants that are      *
*     growing in the wrong place, HI      *
*                                         *
*******************************************


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Thomas Brady <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 10 METER MOBIL ANTENNA ?
Date: 16 Oct 1995 14:31:33 GMT
Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736)
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <45tqc5$hm5$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have a recommendation for a highend commercially
available mobil 10 meter antenna ?


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:35 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 10 METER MOBIL ANTENNA ?
Date: 16 Oct 1995 16:22:07 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45u0rf$[e-mail]>
References: <45tqc5$hm5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <45tqc5$hm5$[e-mail]>,
Thomas Brady  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Does anyone have a recommendation for a highend commercially
>available mobil 10 meter antenna ?

It's hard to beat the price and performance of a 108" CB whip trimmed to
resonate on your favorite 10m frequency. Hamsticks are also very good. On that
single band, there's no need for sophistication.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pa.dec.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m Quad NEC-2 simulations?
Date: 15 Oct 1995 21:50:00 GMT
Organization: ObjectBroker/COM
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45rvm8$[e-mail]>
References: <44r8f2$[e-mail]> <45h45o$[e-mail]> <45k44j$[e-mail]> <45ljvf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: imapc.chi.dec.com

In article <45ljvf$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] () wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> I should like to know, if someone has performend NEC-2 or EZNEC
> simulations of this antenna (or will be doing them),
> and could post some detailed figures, like gain,
> 3dB witdth in E and H plane, F/B ratio, feed point impedance?

Hi Moritz,

I have done fairly extensive NEC-2 runs on 2 meter Quads.  Tell
me the number of elements (or range of elements), the approximate
length of the boom, and what you'd like to optimize (gain, F/B, impedance,
etc.) and I'd be happy to run some off for you.  I can also include
gain plots in Postscript form if you'd like.  If you have particular
geometries you'd like me to run, just give them to me in element
position, and element lengths and I can run a specific antenna.
Usually I just look at forward gain, impedance, F/B, and H plane
pattern, so those are the easiest things to give you.

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!news.redstone.army.mil!news
From: [e-mail] (Ron Edwards)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 3:1 transformer for EWE Antenna
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 16 Oct 95 14:18:58 EST
Organization: Redstone Arsenal, Alabama
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <45ubjm$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 136.205.120.130
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
Originator: [e-mail]
X-Newsreader: WS_NEWS 95.01.13 from Ipswitch Inc.

I'am going to try to build an EWE receiving antenna per the  Feb 95 QST
article but I need help on how to wind the 3:1 transformer.  I'm not
interested in theory just what to get in the way of parts and how to
build it; better yet if anyone makes these I would consider buying one.
Answers can be posted here or to [e-mail]  Thanks in advance.
73 Ron-WB4RUO



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!mhv.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 3:1 transformer for EWE Antenna
Date: 17 Oct 1995 01:26:59 GMT
Organization: MHVNet, the Mid Hudson Valley's Internet connection
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <45v0p3$[e-mail]>
References: <45ubjm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.161.119.240
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Ron Edwards) writes:
>  I'am going to try to build an EWE receiving antenna per the  Feb 95 QST
>  article but I need help on how to wind the 3:1 transformer.  I'm not
>  interested in theory just what to get in the way of parts and how to
>  build it; better yet if anyone makes these I would consider buying one.
>  Answers can be posted here or to [e-mail]  Thanks in advance.
>  73 Ron-WB4RUO
>
>
Remember - the WINDING ratio is 3:1 - the IMPEDANCE transformation ratio is 9:1

There's a guy in Syracuse, NY that makes pretty good stuff - built-in preamps, etc. I'll try to find the name & get back to you.

73, Greg

Greg Becker NA2N
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 Super J Pole for 2M
Date: 12 Oct 1995 20:40:11 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 148
Message-ID: <45jufb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip121.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>        I built the "Super J pole" for 2M in the '94 ARRL Ant. book.
>It is getting a little warn out and I am thinking of replacing it.
>(Well that and I love to build antennas)  I remember reading recently
>that a 5/8 J pole has a lower angle of radiation and/or more gain.
>
>Question one is:
>                If I want to stack the extra 5/8 radiator on top
>                could somebody help me with the dimetions of the
>                phasing stub. (Most of the commercial ant's are stacked
>                5/8 sections so I *assume* that is can be done)
>
>And number two:
>                Can the phasing stub be wound as a coil instead of
>                sticking so far out like in the previously mentioned
>                Ant book article.  Ie: I would like to enclose the whole
>                thing inside a piece of PVC pipe. (inch and half or so
>                and scedule 40 for strenth)

YES it can!
>
>        If I have overlooked any simple antenna fundementals please
>explain them.  I would rather learn than get flamed.  I was unable to
>find the answers to any of these questions in the Antenna Book.  So...
>If you can reconmend the next book that a 1st year ham *must* have for
>antenna building my mail box is open.
>
>                        Thanks in advance
>
>                        73 de KB8STB  Steve
> ###


Stacked J-Pole:

First build a regular mono-band J-Pole from the plans, leaving off the
top pipe cap.

Build a second J-Pole, which will be an L-Pole, the vertical is 38-3/4
inches
from the top to the centerline of the horizontal member.
There are two horizontal pipes spaced together as close as you can get
them using standard 90 degree elbows.  From the centerline of the vertical,
to the centerline of the fittings at the end of the horizontal members the
distance is 18 inches.  A final 90 degree elbow is placed directly under
the vertical section and is soldered to the top of the existing J-Pole.

The finished product resembles an L on top of a J, of course the lower
leg of the L is two pieces of pipe, Horizontal.

I hope you can visualize this.  As soon as I get the time, I will try to
make a new posting with drawings included.

Also I have been asked about the mirror image J-Pole, it's construction
is similar to a regular J-Pole, except that you have a vertical that goes
both up and down, and a matching stub that goes both up and down, with
only one horizontal member.
Requires only two T-Fittings and the pipe to assemble.

Mounting is done on the end of a 1-1/2 inch PVC pipe positioned
horizontally from a tower.  The antenna itself sits vertically.
Coax is mounted to the upper J-Pole with the center conductor to the long
vertical as the antenna is not grounded.

The LJ-Pole mentioned above should be grounded via the mast and therefore
should have the center conductor of the coax to the matching stub rather
than the tall vertical for optimum match.

TTUL - 73+ de Gary - N0ZOI @ K0PFX.#STL.MO.USA.NA


To:
From:  Gary
RE:  The COPPER CACTUS ANTENNA
.
Dear ******
Here are the numbers for the Copper Cactus J-Pole antenna.  I hope you are
already familiar with the construction of the standard J-Pole antenna, so I
won't go into any unnecessary detail.
You can build this unit as a DuoBander, TriBander, QuadBander or whatever
with great success.
You can either feed them with separate coax's or a single coax, separate
coax's make it much easier to tune.
Theres no trick to building them, just remember the overall length is for
the lowest frequency of operation.  In other words, a SingleBander, Dual
Bander and TriBander are all exactly the same length overall 58.09" on
2mtrs.
Feed the coax up the center of the pipes.  Use T fittings at the proper
distance below the top of the antenna for the desired frequency.  The only
problem is that the more bands you try to incorporate into the antenna, the
harder it is to get the SWR flat on all bands.
.
Here are the numbers you are looking for:
Frequency       52MHz   146MHz   223.5MHz   435MHz   912MHz   1265MHZ
Pipe Dia.         1"     3/4"      1/2"      1/2"     3/8"      3/8"
Stub            54.70"  19.36"    12.65"     6.46"    3.02"     2.16"
Overall Length 163.92"  58.09"    37.94"    19.39"    9.07"     6.49"
Separation        5"      2"      1-1/4"     3/4"     1/2"      1/4"
Connect at        6"    2-1/4"    1-1/2"      1"      3/4"      1/2"
.
For best results, build the highest band first, for eg. the 435MHz antenna,
If you really want it to look neat, use 3/8" copper for the vertical and
1/4" copper for the transformer section (stub).  Naturally the finished
product will be in the shape of a "J".
Now build the next band, for eg. the 223.5MHz antenna, by adding pipe to the
T-connector that is the base of the 435MHz antenna, I use 1/2" for the
vertical and 3/8" for the stub of this section.
Now build the 146MHz antenna, don't forget the overall length of the antenna
is the lowest frequency you will be using.  I use 3/4" for the vertical and
1/2 for the stub.
The stub must be parallel to the vertical, however you can point the base of
each stub in any direction you like.  I prefer 3 equal distant points, but
you can make them all on the same side if you wish.  I feel the three points
make it look like a cactus.
My measurements on overall length, and stub length are from the centerline
of
the separation pipe (horizontal) to the top of the antenna.
The separation distance is technically from centerline to centerline, but
inside measurements are fine and visually look better.  Some of the
measurements are less than physically possible, in this case just push the
T and elbow as close as you can get them, no need to trim the fittings.
The Connect at measurement is from the top of the horizontal member to the
point of connection.
Final Note:  If you use 1/2" pipe for all the construction, on the 2meter
stub, add 1/4" to its length, or use pipe-caps and adjust them up or down
to get the 1/4" additional length.
The antenna should be in perfect tune, SWR less than 1.2 - 1 on all bands,
using separate coax for each band.
Solder all the joints before installing the coax, any pipe you have left
over can be used as the mast.
To install the coax, drill a 1/4" hole in the top of the horizontal part of
each T-fitting closest to the vertical, then tilt the drill at an angle, so
that the drill bit is sorta heading down the vertical.
.
Enjoy Building:  If you have any questions just ask, or if you need a
picture
or further instructions, just send me a message and I will promptly respond.
.
PS  Until you are familiar with the construction techniques of the J-Pole, I
wouldn't attempt any more than three bands the first time out.  In fact, A
dual-bander, using the above dimensions will be perfect every time.
.
73s de Gary - N0ZOI @ K0PFX.#STL.MO.USA.NA
.




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!server2.rz.uni-leipzig.de!news.uni-jena.de!prakinf2.PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 Super J Pole for 2M
Date: 16 Oct 1995 11:03:14 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <45te5i$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>                Can the phasing stub be wound as a coil instead of
>                sticking so far out like in the previously mentioned
>                Ant book article.

Surely it can. But how do you check the electrical length and
phase shift? Remember that the purpose of stacking is
a gain increase, which is demanding more from the phasing
section than just "Oh yes, it loads up fine!"

Probabely, for a one-off design and if you do not have an antenna
test site at hand, it is the best to stick with the hair pin.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!noao!news.eas.asu.edu!asuvax!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 75 ohm parallel coax
Date: 14 Oct 1995 04:33:49 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <45nejd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


        Two pieces of 75 ohm coax in parallel terminateed in 37.5
ohms will have the same loss as one piece terminated in 75 ohms
because in parallel they each carry half the power so since they
each lose the same percentage of power the loss is the same.
Charlie,  W7XC
--



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!mcshub!hwfn!ae414
From: [e-mail] (Harland MacKenzie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
Date: 14 Oct 1995 15:54:22 GMT
Organization: Hamilton-Wentworth FreeNet, Ontario, Canada.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <45omfe$[e-mail]>
References: <45g8qu$[e-mail]> <45ld0v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: But for goodness sakes DON'T put up anything anyone else can touch or
: anything that can touch a power line if the wind blows or the antenna
: falls! We don't want to read any stories about you!
: 73 Tom

Fear not Tom, most of the crazy ideas I have had I ruled out due to possible
safety concerns.  I thought about dropping a wire off the side of the
building but feel that having the high voltage point blowing in the wind
was only trouble waiting to happen.
 --
Harland MacKenzie, B.Eng., M.Eng.
Dundas, Ontario
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
VE3HMI on 146.895-


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!dialup65.azstarnet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Mandaville)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 19:42:58 +0600
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45f8i4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup65.azstarnet.com

In article <45f8i4$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Harland MacKenzie) wrote:

I am on the 8th floor with no real ground


I would certainly second the idea of DL5UH.  You have a wonderful height
advantage.  See if you can find two points down on or near the ground to
which you could tie the ends of an inverted V with apex at your balcony.
The V would best slop outward down and away from the building.  Use 28 or
30 gauge wire that would be nearly invisible.  This would be a balanced
antenna and thus no RF ground would be needed.  If fed with window line
from a tuner with balanced output the antenna should work on many if not
all bands. Of course keep the lower ends out of reach of passers-by!

Good luck.

Jim, KG5KP


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!newsserver.rdcs.Kodak.COM!usenet
From: Andy Jeutter <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
Date: 17 Oct 1995 13:33:31 GMT
Organization: Eastman Kodak Company
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <460bbb$[e-mail]>
References: <45f8i4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgpc3.ag01.kodak.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Harland,

I use a magnetic loop since 1992 on my balcony. The ant
is home brew and tunes on 80, 40 and 20 meters. The main
loop is made of silver plated Cu pipe with 40 mm dia. Further
it has a gamma match and a motor driven capacitor that can handle
about 100 W.
The performance is similar to a short dipole and ok for local
contacts. Little DX on 20 meters is also possible.

73, Andy DL4SEI



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <45f8i4$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 09:47:37 GMT
Lines: 37

In article <45f8i4$[e-mail]>,
-snip-
>       Any ideas that I could try on a 25 foot balcony ?
>       I am working on code to get access to higher frequency but I am
>dsylexic so the 5WPM was a real battle, 12WPM is not going well.
>       Any good ideas ( poor ones also welcomed ) ?
>                                       73 de VE3HMI   Harland
------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, 25 feet is quite enough to get a antenna working for 80 meters, if
you are willing to do some careful impedance matching and resonating.  A
center fed 25 foot long dipole at 3.5 MHz has a feedpoint impedance of about
18 -j760 ohms (free space values).  This means that electrically it looks like
an 18 ohm resistor in series with a capacitor whose reactance is -760 ohms.
All you need to do is put a coil in the center whose reactance is equal to
that and you then have a resonant, 18 ohm dipole.  At 3.5 MHz, you will need a
coil of approximately 34.5 microhenrys.  To feed it with 50 ohm coax, just
take each lead and connect them to various positions on the coil until you get
a low SWR.  Not hard at all really, especially if you have an SWR analyzer of
some kind such as the MFJ-259.  The only drawback is that the inductance of
the coil must be adjusted very carefully for resonance and when it is
adjusted, the bandwidth will be very narrow - perhaps 50 kHz or so for a 2:1
SWR.  When properly resonated and matched, this antenna will come quite close
to the performance of a full size dipole, except for the narrow bandwidth.  A
little cleverness with a motorized roller inductor and you can solve that
problem too.  Be sure to use large diameter wire for the coil for maximum Q --
#12 would be good, and make sure the surface is clean and free of corrosion.
I would also include a "choke-type" balun at the feedpoint to help prevent
feedline radiation, although that is not strictly necessary.  Being up as high
as you are, you should have a booming signal!!

Good luck,

p.s.  No commercial connection with MFJ, just a satisfied customer.


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:47 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.continuum.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna 400 ft from rig
Date: 17 Oct 1995 01:59:59 GMT
Organization: Ocean Surveys, Inc.
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <45v2mv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cd-38.continuum.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.09

In <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> writes:
>I live at the bottom of a 80 ft. bluff and would like to put a tower up on
>the top (for obvious reasons!) :-) . There is about 400-450 feet of
>distance between my house and the top of the bluff (the slope is 20+
>percent).
>
>Does anybody have any experience running coax and rotor control cables for
>that distance for an HF tribander?  Am I nuts to even consider this?

Possibly!

You may want to consider using a long run of 200 ohm 4-wire parallel wire
transmission line.  Lower loss than coax for the long run, and easily
transformed back to 50 ohms at the tower.


P.J. "Josh" Rovero                            work:  [e-mail]
Ocean Surveys, Inc.                           play:   [e-mail]
Old Saybrook, CT 06475 USA               Amateur Radio:  KK1D



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!ub!dsinc!news.enter.net!usenet
From: Ken Florence <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna 400 ft from rig
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 22:17:22 -0700
Organization: ENTER.NET
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp1.enter.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b1 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> I live at the bottom of a 80 ft. bluff and would like to put a
tower up on
> the top (for obvious reasons!) :-) . There is about 400-450
feet of
> distance between my house and the top of the bluff (the slope
is 20+
> percent).
>
> Does anybody have any experience running coax and rotor
control cables for
> that distance for an HF tribander?  Am I nuts to even consider
this?
>
> 73, Jim K9WIE
Absolutely not. Use hard line (CATV cable can be gotten cheap).
Out here on the East Coast, u can find salvage yards which have
wire. I found one with 8 conductor 14 gauge cable. Sells the
stuff for a buck a pound. This will easily turn a rotor that is
400 feet away. GL and hv fun. Sounds like a great location...

--
Ken Florence  KA3PLS
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!newsstand.tc.umn.edu!usenet
From: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna 400 ft from rig
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 95 17:11:36 CST
Organization: University of Minnesota
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-5-130.gw.umn.edu
X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_16
X-POPMail-Charset: English

I live at the bottom of a 80 ft. bluff and would like to put a tower up on
the top (for obvious reasons!) :-) . There is about 400-450 feet of
distance between my house and the top of the bluff (the slope is 20+
percent).

Does anybody have any experience running coax and rotor control cables for
that distance for an HF tribander?  Am I nuts to even consider this?

73, Jim K9WIE



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Attention all Ham WWW users - read this!
Date: 16 Oct 95 19:38:51 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Everything Amateur Radio related on the World Wide Web in ONE place:
I don't know how many USENET posts I've seen about looking for Ham Sites.
Waste no more on-line time searching for Ham related URL's on the Web!
I've put them ALL in one place. Well, almost all.  And it's free!

My HAM-WWW.HTML World Wide Web bookmark file is now ON the web:
http://uhavax.hartford.edu/disk$userdata/faculty/newsvhf/www/ham-www.html
This is all links and nothing but links, all the time, updated regularly.

Ham Webmasters: I invite you to write it into your homepage to supply all
your links!  Being a Webmaster myself, I know what a pain it is to be
constantly updating links.  Now you can relax and leave the work to me.

Ham Web-browsers: Download it for use as a bookmark file.
(Please download it rather than link to it if you can, to cut traffic.
I'll continue it as long as it doesn't put my site into overload!)
                  _\\///_
   secretary:    (' O O ')    North East Weak Signal group, ARRL affil.
 ---------------ooO-(_)-Ooo--------------------------------------------
|  73 de Ron WZ1V,        email: [e-mail]            |
|  Grid FN31mp 50-2304MHz   BBS: 203-768-4758 weeknights/weekends only |
|       N.E.W.S. group Web Page:   http://uhavax.hartford.edu/newsvhf  |
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:51 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!watnews.watson.ibm.com!bocanews.bocaraton.ibm.com!news
From: Ed@Ed
Subject: Re: Attention all Ham WWW users - read this!
Sender: [e-mail] (News Admin ID)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 11:54:41 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eehoward.bocaraton.ibm.com
Reply-To: Ed@Ed
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: IBM, Boca Raton, FL
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2
Lines: 35

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>Everything Amateur Radio related on the World Wide Web in ONE place:

Ron... It don't work? Here is what I get;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-ERROR-(404):  file specification syntax error
Requested method: GET
Requested URL:    /disk$userdata/facility/newsvhf/www/ham-www.html
HTTP protocol:    HTTP/1.0

-------- additional request headers --------
Accept: */*; q=0.300
Accept: application/octet-stream; q=0.100
Accept: text/plain
Accept: text/html
Accept: application/inf
Accept: audio/x-wav
Accept: audio/x-aiff
Accept: audio/basic
Accept: video/avs-video
Accept: video/x-msvideo
Accept: video/quicktime
Accept: video/mpeg
Accept: image/x-bitmap
Accept: image/bmp
Accept: image/tiff
Accept: image/jpeg
Accept: image/gif
Accept: application/editor
User-Agent: IBM WebExplorer /v1.01
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I tried the URL 3 times just to make sure it was typed right.  HELP

73  Ed



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us!SABINW
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: balun at transmatch input
Date: 14 Oct 1995 22:32:37 GMT
Organization: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Cedar Rapids, IA,  52401
Lines: 3
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45pdq5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us

I have always thought the main purpose of the balun at the
transmatch input was to establish a floating point, isolated
from ground, for the *desired* signal.  Do we still believe that?


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: balun at transmatch input
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 16:15:57 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45pdq5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:

>I have always thought the main purpose of the balun at the
>transmatch input was to establish a floating point, isolated
>from ground, for the *desired* signal.  Do we still believe that?

I don't think it does that, but I also don't think that's a necessary
function.  The (my) intended purpose in moving the balun to the input
was to isolate it from the high impedances created by non-resonant
antennas. In theory, that would then insure equal currents on the
transmission line, regardless of the load.

At this point in the "ferrite bead" thread, tests and analysis seem to
disprove that this benefit is actually achieved, at least with a
single-ended tuner.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:53 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: balun at transmatch input
Date: 16 Oct 1995 05:47:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45t9ms$[e-mail]>
References: <45pdq5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45pdq5$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] writes:

>
>I have always thought the main purpose of the balun at the
>transmatch input was to establish a floating point, isolated
>from ground, for the *desired* signal.  Do we still believe that?
>
>
We still believe that. It just doesn't improve balance or reduce balun
impedance requirements when it is moved to the input. See Roy's last posts
for detail, or my early arguements.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!relay-4.mail.demon.net
From: Ian G3SEK <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Battle Creek Special?
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 22:11:43 GMT
Organization: IFWtech
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: relay-4.mail.demon.net
X-Broken-Date: Saturday, Oct 14, 1995 22.11.43
X-Newsreader: Newswin Alpha 0.7

Does anyone have full constructional details of the Battle Creek
Special antenna for 40/80/160m, please?

There is a brief discussion in ON4UN's "Low Band DXing", but it
only gives partial details.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK            Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
                            'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Professionally:
IFW Technical Services       Clear technical English - anywhere.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:55 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Craig R. Caldwell )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: birds
Date: 16 Oct 1995 03:21:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <45sj3b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sd7-22.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Oct 15  8:21:15 PM PDT 1995

  Does anyone have any good ideas on how to keep birds off of my
tri-bander.  It is directly over my patio what a mess they make.
Thanks :)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!nntp
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: birds
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Dick Harper <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Oct 95 10:21:25 CDT
References: <45sj3b$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: dharper.his.kumc.edu
Lines: 19

[e-mail] (Craig R. Caldwell ) wrote:
>
>   Does anyone have any good ideas on how to keep birds off of my
> tri-bander.  It is directly over my patio what a mess they make.
> Thanks :)

Get an owl.  Garden shops around Kansas City sell inflatable owls for
this purpose.  They also sell inflatable snakes.  Hopefully the crows
won't kill it.  A billboard company downtown uses one to keep the
birds off their sign.

Hunting stores (gun shops) often sell plastic owl decoys.
No, these aren't for shooting owls, they're for hunting crows.
They offer more weight, higher cost ($15-$20) but won't shrink
in cold weather.

Good hunting,
de N0USP, Dick



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!news00.sunet.se!sunic!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: birds
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <45sj3b$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 22:13:28 GMT
Lines: 8

: Get an owl.  Garden shops around Kansas City sell inflatable owls for


I've tried owls. Got a big plastic one for the garden. For a few days the
birds were wary but soon they were perching right on the silly owl. Birds
are dumb but but they gradually recover.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:57 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: birds
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 95 23:10:12 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45sj3b$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>I have a woodpecker who pecks on my
>metal chimney at daybreak. Try that for entertainment! Maybe you could
>give that beam a good grease job and the birds would not be able to get a
>grip.

I'll bet a few minutes of Black Sabbath every morning would put a stop
to that. <g>

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:58 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: birds
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 23:14:17 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 21

Steve Ellington ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Craig R. Caldwell ([e-mail]) wrote:
: :   Does anyone have any good ideas on how to keep birds off of my
: : tri-bander.  It is directly over my patio what a mess they make.
: : Thanks :)

: If someone had a way to keep birds off of things they would be rich and
: famous. Pigeons off of buildings, Doves off of wires, Crows out of the
: garden, Bats out of your belfrys, Parrots out of the crackers, Sea gulls

etc.

Well, I doubt they are very famous, but every so often I get a pack of
those "bingo" cards with one advertising "BIRD-X" which is some sort of
goop you can put on things that is supposed to be effective in getting
birds to roost somewhere else.  I hung one of the cards up on my cubicle
wall as a joke, but got tired of it and tossed it.  Maybe someone else will
recognize this and come up with a company name and address.

73, K7ITM



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:03:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!panix!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Peter D. Pruyne)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: birds
Date: 17 Oct 1995 04:11:50 GMT
Organization: SysCom Strategies Inc.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <45vae6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pdp.pr.mcs.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) says:
>
>Steve Ellington ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: Craig R. Caldwell ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: :   Does anyone have any good ideas on how to keep birds off of my
>: : tri-bander.  It is directly over my patio what a mess they make.
>: : Thanks :)
>
        I have used bottle rockets with good effect.  They are small,
unlikely to actually kill one.  My buddy had a tree full of birds, really
full, countably full.  Fired one bottle rocket up thru the branches three
different times over a two day span.  The whoosh seemed to scare the
hell out of em as it rattled upward.  Birds clearly gossip, they never
back.

PDP, KB9LEC


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:00 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cc.iu.net!news
From: [e-mail]   (Bill Newkirk)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Brand-X Autotuner, Brand-Y Radio?
Date: 14 Oct 1995 13:39:01 GMT
Organization: Space Coast Amateur Technical Group
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <45oehl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Newkirk)
NNTP-Posting-Host: netport-17.iu.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie) writes:
>A Ham equipment salesman told me that the Kenwood AT-50 Autotuner could be
>rewired for use with an HF rig made by another company (Alinco?).  Also, I
>had the impression that the SGC Autotuners were adaptable to other brands.

the answer should be "sure!", the trick would be in getting the control interface
right. i would think there'd be:

a keyline.
a tune in progress indicator (in one product i've worked with, this reduces output
power to a safe and qrm minimizing level while tuning the antenna)
a frequency has changed line or a "reset and retune" switch.
tuner ready.
tuner fault.

Bill Newkirk WB9IVR                  The Space Coast Amateur Technical Group
Melbourne, FL                       duty now for the future of amateur radio
Lombardi's 1st Law of Business:
Companies succeed in spite of their best effort.  If they succeed at all.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:01 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.math.psu.edu!chi-news.cic.net!brutus.bright.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.interlog.com!io.org!reptiles.org!westonia!humnet.humberc.on.ca!hduff
Subject: Brand-X Autotuner, Brand-Y Radio?
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 15:04:35 EST
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: HumberNet LSS
Lines: 27


>
> In <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie) writes:
> >A Ham equipment salesman told me that the Kenwood AT-50 Autotuner could be
> >rewired for use with an HF rig made by another company (Alinco?).  Also, I
> >had the impression that the SGC Autotuners were adaptable to other brands.


Apparently the Kenwood AT-50 WILL work with the Alinco DX-70 HF rig.
I think Alinco did this intentionally since they do not offer an
optional tuner yet...
it gives new owners an option rather than "No auto-tuner available".
Not sure ablut the SGC model.

Hugh Duff  VA3TO  Toronto


---
 ■ NFX v1.3 [000]

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
  HumberNet LSS (Learning Support System) - Humber College, Toronto
     "Tomorrow's communication and learning environment, today"
          Visit our Website at http://humnet.humberc.on.ca/



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news1.toronto.fonorola.net!infoshare!whome!gts!westonia!humnet.humberc.on.ca!hduff
Subject: Brand-X Autotuner, Brand-Y Radio?
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 11:44:00 EST
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: HumberNet LSS
Lines: 27


>
> In <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie) writes:
> >A Ham equipment salesman told me that the Kenwood AT-50 Autotuner could be
> >rewired for use with an HF rig made by another company (Alinco?).  Also, I
> >had the impression that the SGC Autotuners were adaptable to other brands.


Apparently the Kenwood AT-50 WILL work with the Alinco DX-70 HF rig.
I think Alinco did this intentionally since they do not offer an
optional tuner yet...
it gives new owners an option rather than "No auto-tuner available".
Not sure ablut the SGC model.

Hugh Duff  VA3TO  Toronto


---
 ■ NFX v1.3 [000]

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
  HumberNet LSS (Learning Support System) - Humber College, Toronto
     "Tomorrow's communication and learning environment, today"
          Visit our Website at http://humnet.humberc.on.ca/



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!news.tek.com!netman.ens.tek.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Terry Burge)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Butternut goes down/quad goes up
Date: 16 Oct 1995 13:01:13 -0700
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR, USA
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <45udm9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: netman.ens.tek.com

Well, I spent the weekend taking down my HF6V vertical and putting up a
Lightning Bolt 2 element 5 band quad. Going to be a change going to a
real antenna that actualy directs the signal. Made my 4 section Rohn
mast rotate by mounting the HD-73 rotator on an 'S' like pipe affair and
rigging up a slip joint at the eve of the mobile home. Guiding it at
two levels to make sure it stays put. Course being Oregon it just had
to start raining before I got finished. That's life.

Now to see if I can get this thing tuned up good.

Terry
KI7M



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:04 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!wizard.pn.com!ci-pioneer!panda!org!org!*domain!*site!*user!anker!jan!jan.anker
From: [e-mail]@*user@*site.*domain.org.org (Jan Anker)
Date: 13 Oct 95 22:22:00
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Fidonet: PandA's Den BBS Usenet: SATINS/Net330 uucp gateway * PandA's Den BBS *
Lines: 29


From: [e-mail] (Jan Anker)
Subject: Re: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
Organization: Anchor Datacomm

In article <45lks8$[e-mail]> Ken DESMET <[e-mail]> writes:
>From: Ken DESMET <[e-mail]>
>Subject: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
>Date: 13 Oct 1995 12:08:40 GMT

>Hi,

>Does anyone know a company named "CHASE" who builds antennas for
>measuring 30MHz to 1GHz EMC/EMI emmisions. Any tips around this
>would be very welcome.
>Meany thanks in advance for your hints.

>Ken             ([e-mail])
yes, this antenna is offered through several channels but is made by chase.
No info about chase here at home, but the Rohde&Schwarz name for the same
antenna (made by chase) is CBL 6111. tel nr R&S [phone].

Jan  [e-mail]
--
|Fidonet:  Jan Anker 1:330/204.1
|Internet: [e-mail]@*user@*site.*domain.org.org
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:05 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!ieunet!news.tcd.ie!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (TCD News System )
Organization: Teltec, MEE, Trinity College Dublin
X-Newsreader: <WinQVT/Net v3.9>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 14:37:46 GMT
Lines: 44

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail]@*user@*site.*domain.org.org (Jan Anker) writes:

>
>From: [e-mail] (Jan Anker)
>Subject: Re: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
>Organization: Anchor Datacomm
>
>In article <45lks8$[e-mail]> Ken DESMET <[e-mail]> writes:
>>From: Ken DESMET <[e-mail]>
>>Subject: CHASE EMI/EMC MEASUREMENT ANTENNAS
>>Date: 13 Oct 1995 12:08:40 GMT
>
>>Hi,
>
>>Does anyone know a company named "CHASE" who builds antennas for
>>measuring 30MHz to 1GHz EMC/EMI emmisions. Any tips around this
>>would be very welcome.
>>Meany thanks in advance for your hints.
>
>>Ken             ([e-mail])
>yes, this antenna is offered through several channels but is made by chase.
>No info about chase here at home, but the Rohde&Schwarz name for the same
>antenna (made by chase) is CBL 6111. tel nr R&S [phone].
>
>Jan  [e-mail]
>--
>|Fidonet:  Jan Anker 1:330/204.1
>|Internet: [e-mail]@*user@*site.*domain.org.org
>|
>| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
>

Try Chase Electrics Ltd,  St Leonards House,
St Leonards Road,  Mortlake, London  SW14 7LY
phone UK 0181-8787747, fax UK 0181-8765928

Two antennas may be required to cover the range mentioned above.
I use them as LMR Field Strength Measurement reference antennas.

Dr. Gerry Butler,  CEng. MIEE. [[e-mail]]
TELTEC-TCD (Radio Propagation Planning), Trinity College,Dublin 2,Ireland
Dept. of Electronic and Electrical Engineering,
[ Dublin+Wicklow Mountain Rescue / EI0CH / EMT-D ]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 14 Oct 1995 11:10:40 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <45o5rg$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx01-04.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) writes:
;  Cecil A. Moore -FT-~ ([e-mail]) wrote:
;
;  : My noticable problem may be mostly psychological. I'm worried about not
;  : knowing when to worry. :-) If my currents are 20% unbalanced, does that
;  : mean I radiate 2dB? 1dB? from the ladder-line?   20log(.8)~2dB
;
;  Depends on many things.  If the antenna feedpoint impedance is highly
;  reactive and the 20% current into the ladder line sees mostly a resistance
;  (assuming that resistance to represent radiation), you could be in deep
;  trouble; on the other hand, if the current into the feedline is all
;  reactive, then there is no radiation associated with it. . .

Absolutely untrue! Current is current, and it will radiate, regardless of its
phase relative to some arbitrary standard. Similarly, any current flowing
through a resistor, regardless of its phase relative to any standard, will
cause a dissipation equal to I^2 * R.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 14 Oct 1995 11:20:49 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <45o6eh$[e-mail]>
References: <45gp5b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx01-04.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:
>. . .
>
>  Part of my question was: How good is good enough? A 10% current imbalance is
>  about 1dB. Some say that's good enough. Does that mean that 1dB never makes it
>  to the antenna? Is a 20% imbalance good or bad?
>
>. . .

What it means is that 1 dB of your signal is radiating from the feedline instead
of the antenna. This may not be bad at all, as it might fill your pattern in
some desirable direction. Or it may be bad, if the direction is one in which you
want a null. It may also be bad if the feedline runs beside the telephone or
power lines, since it can induce RF into them and possibly cause interference
to telephones or appliances. When I'm running 5 watts, 1 dB is around 1-1/4
watts, which might not cause any trouble. If you're running a kW, it's more like
250 watts, which might.

So there's no single answer about whether it's good or bad, or how bad it might
be. Me, I like my antenna to be an antenna, and feedline to be a feedline. That
way I have a better chance of predicting how the whole thing will work. But that's
just how I am. . .

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:08 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 14 Oct 1995 11:30:29 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <45o70l$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx01-04.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
;     [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
;
;  >>>a------]]]]]]]]]]-------c
;  >>>b------]]]]]]]]]]--------d
;  >>>
;  >>>a to c must = b to d voltage differential
;  >>>a to b must = c to d voltage differential
;
;  >> . . . the coaxial balun doesn't seem to follow this rule . . .
;
;  >No, the voltages here are the DIFFERENCES from a to c,and b to d. These
;  >pairs of voltage MUST be equal and share common phase because the balun is
;  >a 1:1 transformer in this mode, even when wound with coax.
;
;  Tom, I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing, but let me try to
;  state this a different way.
;
;  Let's assume the above balun is a choked-shield coaxial balun instead of
;  the bifilar choke/transformer.  Let's also assume we input 30V P-P.  Now,
;  let's connect a 12.5 ohm load resistor from "c" to ground, and a 37.5 ohm
;  load resistor from "d" to ground.
;
;  Under these conditions, according to Reflections, the voltage from "c" to
;  ground will be 10V, and the voltage from "d" to ground will be 20V.  This
;  means that the voltage across a:c will be 20V (30V minus 10V), and the
;  b:d voltage will be 10V (0V minus 10V).  Thus, the voltage across the two
;  sides of the balun isn't equal.
;
;  Tell me what I'm doing wrong here.
;
;  73,
;
;  Jack  WB3U

The currents in the two resistors will be equal, so the voltage across the
37.5 ohm resistor will be three times that across the 12.5 ohm resistor, not
two times as you said. It doesn't matter if the balun is wound with coax or
two bifilar wires; operation is the same.

For applicable equations you can use to quantitatively solve these problems,
see another of my posts today, or download IBALUN.TXT from
ftp.teleport.com/vendors/w7el.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:09 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 15 Oct 1995 10:51:21 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 43
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45r759$[e-mail]>
References: <45o6eh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45o6eh$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

>
>What it means is that 1 dB of your signal is radiating from the feedline
>instead
>of the antenna. This may not be bad at all, as it might fill your pattern
in
>some desirable direction. Or it may be bad, if the direction is one in
which
>you
>want a null. It may also be bad if the feedline runs beside the telephone
or
>power lines, since it can induce RF into them and possibly cause
interference
>to telephones or appliances. When I'm running 5 watts, 1 dB is around
1-1/4
>watts, which might not cause any trouble. If you're running a kW, it's
more
>like
>250 watts, which might.

Roy,

The problem with many questions is the data is too general. That makes it
difficult to give specific answers. Cecil's question is a good question,
but also a good example of this problem.

We know next to nothing about the real current distribution in his system.
Did Cecil measure the parallel currents at a parallel mode current loop?
Is the feedline short compared to the antenna? Is the feedline near
something that "fights" radiation, allowing or causing higher parallel
current without raising feedline radiation (low r rad feedline)? Is the
current bunched up in the feedline because of distributed loading effects
(low r rad feedline)? Does the feedline current at the point he measured
truly represent the current in the radiator?

The problem isn't as simple as how many electrons we are wiggling at one
point in an unknown system like this, the answer requires knowing how many
net electrons we are wiggling (as seen from a long distance away)! I think
the best answer might be "no one can tell".

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 16 Oct 1995 05:46:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 44
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45t9m4$[e-mail]>
References: <45o6eh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45o6eh$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

>What it means is that 1 dB of your signal is radiating from the feedline
>instead
>of the antenna.
<SNIP>
>So there's no single answer about whether it's good or bad, or how bad it
>might
>be. Me, I like my antenna to be an antenna, and feedline to be a
feedline.
<SNIP>

Hi Roy, I posted a response to this but my mailer must have ate it!

I think Cecils question lacked all the data necessary to determine the
precise losses. Let me explain why, the information lacked:

Current distribution details. For example, how much current along the
entire feedline in both excitation modes? Along the antenna? He measured
at *one* point in an unknown system.

The current was not normalized to the R Rad at the current loops of the
antenna and the feedline (in common mode excitation).

To really answer him, we need to know how many electrons are moving and in
what direction at EVERY point in the system at a given instant. We also
need to know what the entire system "looks like" from a distance away,
that includes extenal effects.

For example, RF could also be induced in additional conductors paralleling
the feedline. If these external currents generate out of phase fields the
feedline radiation can be reduced or canceled even when parallel line
currents are large! If the currents are evenly distributed and result in
in-phase fields, the radiation could be severe even with low currents.

That's why I suggested we need to know the radiation resistance of the
line in a parallel excitation mode and the antenna in both modes at a
minimum, as well as the current distribution in each.

I'm sure the only correct answer to Cecil's question is "we can't tell for
sure".

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:12 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to,
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 08:01:18 GMT
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45o5e7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

>For a long time, I've promoted the idea of putting a 1:1 current balun at
>the input of a tuner to improve current balance. This doesn't work.

Hi Roy,

Many thanks for taking time to post this material.  It's an excellent
analysis of the balun/tuner situation, and I'm still studying all the
points you've made.

Unfortunately, after downloading the full version from your FTP site, I
became stuck in a very early stage of the analysis.  I would certainly
appreciate your help with this, particularly as the nature of the problem
has been a subject of considerable debate in this thread.

Rather than trying to explain the problem entirely in one post, I think
it will be easier to take it a step at a time.  Following are your
first two formulas, to which I've added comments:

You wrote:

> a ---------UUUUUU---------- c
> b --.------UUUUUU-------.-- d
>     |    __________     |
>     |   |          |    |
>      ---|    Zw    |----
>         |__________|

  << snip >>

>  Va - Vc = Vb - Vd  . . .

> From the first equation can also be derived that Va - Vb = Vc - Vd.

First, these equations appear to me to be valid only if the sign of the
voltages are explicitly stated.  That is, either the voltages must be
instantaneous measurements with polarity included, or "+ and -" polarity
must be assigned to the numbers as phase indicators if they represent P-P,
rms, average, etc.

Second, if measurements are made as P-P, rms, etc. without regard to
phase, such that numbers entered in the formula represent the absolute
value of each voltage, then the second formula (Va - Vb = Vc - Vd) must
be changed to:

      Va + Vb = Vc + Vd

I believe this holds true so long as Va and Vc are in phase with each
other, but are 180 degrees out of phase with both Vb and Vd.

If you see an error in any of this, I would appreciate your help in
identifying it.  Otherwise I'm stuck, for reasons I'll try explain more
fully in my next post.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:14 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to,
Date: 15 Oct 1995 18:36:41 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <45rkbp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-09.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>     [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

>. . .

>  Unfortunately, after downloading the full version from your FTP site, I
>  became stuck in a very early stage of the analysis.  I would certainly
>  appreciate your help with this, particularly as the nature of the problem
>  has been a subject of considerable debate in this thread.

>  You wrote:
>
>  > a ---------UUUUUU---------- c
>  > b --.------UUUUUU-------.-- d
>  >     |    __________     |
>  >     |   |          |    |
>  >      ---|    Zw    |----
>  >         |__________|
>
>    << snip >>
>
>  >  Va - Vc = Vb - Vd  . . .
>
>  > From the first equation can also be derived that Va - Vb = Vc - Vd.
>
>  First, these equations appear to me to be valid only if the sign of the
>  voltages are explicitly stated.  That is, either the voltages must be
>  instantaneous measurements with polarity included, or "+ and -" polarity
>  must be assigned to the numbers as phase indicators if they represent P-P,
>  rms, average, etc.

>. . .

The voltages are instantaneous. When you're dealing with sine waves, you can just operate with
the phasors and it becomes simply a vector subtraction. The reference point (for the "-"
terminal) can be anywhere, as long as it's the same for all voltages. Perhaps an example will
help.

Hook a sine-wave signal generator of one volt (peak-to-peak, rms, peak, -- you choose) with the
"+" or "hot" terminal to point "a" and the "-" or "ground" terminal to anywhere you'd like to
call ground. Hook a second, locked signal generator from point "c" to the same "ground", and
adjust this one so it's exactly twice the amplitude of the first and leads the first one in phase
by 45 degrees. If we call the phase of the first generator our reference phase, the first source
is 1 /_ 0 degrees, and the second is 2 /_ 45 degrees. Va - Vc then = 1 /_ 0 degrees - 2 /_ 45
degrees = 1.47 /_ -106 degrees. If the first signal generator amplitude was 1 volt rms, the
amplitude of Va - Vc is 1.47 volts rms; if it was 1 kV peak, Va - Vc is 1.47 kV peak. (Note that
if we had chosen any other reference phase, or any other place to call "ground", the result would
have been exactly the same.) Technically what we're doing here is generating one voltage Va0 and
a second one Vc0 and subtracting them to get Vac = Va0 - Vc0. I called this Va - Vc since the
choice of reference 0 doesn't matter. Perhaps I should have written Vac = Vbd.

Hook points b and d to any impedances. Measure the voltage from b to any reference with a vector
voltmeter or oscilloscope. Similarly measure the voltage from d to the same reference. The vector
difference between them will be 0.77 /_ -67.5 degrees. Or, if you've got the capability, you can
measure directly from b to d and get the same result.

Alternatively, connect a signal generator with the "+" terminal to point a and the "-" terminal
to point c. Hook your voltmeter between points b and d. It will measure a voltage which is equal
in magnitude and phase to the signal generator's voltage.

Since there was a question about this, it may not have been obvious that the impedances in the
equations are complex. I'm sorry for taking this for granted. In the engineering world, these
things are assumed.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to,
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 22:42:14 GMT
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45rkbp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

>The voltages are instantaneous. When you're dealing with sine waves,
>you can just operate with the phasors and it becomes simply a vector
>subtraction. The reference point (for the "-" terminal) can be anywhere,
>as long as it's the same for all voltages.

Roy, thanks for the explanation.  The example makes perfect sense to me,
except for one thing.  Referenced to the diagram below, are you saying
that the voltage at c can be out of phase with the voltage at a, even if
the a:c "winding" is the center conductor in a short, straight piece of
coax?

    a ---------UUUUUU---------- c
    b ---------UUUUUU---------- d

Also, do you see an error in my previous statement that:

   Va + Vb = Vc + Vd  (if V represents absolute value of the voltage, and
if Va is 180 degrees out of phase with Vb, and Vc is 180 degrees out of
phase with Vd)?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newshub1.wanet.net!ucsnews!newshub.sdsu.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Reich, Christopher N)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ferrite beads, antenna tuners
Date: 15 Oct 95 13:15:34 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


I think I missed the original post, but I've been following the thread for
quite some time.  While I won't pretend to have understood all of what has
been discussed, I wish I had kept all that has transpired.

I have noticed on several occasions that participants have suggested that
the "right way to do it" would be to have an air-core coil providing a
link-coupled balanced output, and the tuning capacitor at the antenna side
should float, with no connection to ground or common.

Gentlemen, if you'll refer to your recent issues of the ARRL Handbook (mine
is 1991), in the chapter labelled 'Station Accessories', you'll find just
such a device described as "A Link-Coupled Matching Network".  I myself am
in the process of gathering the parts for the project.  After all that has
been said on the thread,  I feel compelled to ask, since no one else had
mentioned the article/device, is there something inherently limiting to the
design or has it simply been overlooked by the participants in this thread?

Am I preparing to build a pig-in-a-poke?  Could general improvements be
made?  Has this been overlooked?

73 - Chris WB2DYJ  [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ferrite beads, antenna tuners
Date: 15 Oct 1995 23:46:41 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <45s6h1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite8.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Reich, Christopher N) wrote:
[snip]
>
>Gentlemen, if you'll refer to your recent issues of the ARRL Handbook (mine
>is 1991), in the chapter labelled 'Station Accessories', you'll find just
>such a device described as "A Link-Coupled Matching Network".  I myself am
>in the process of gathering the parts for the project.  After all that has
>been said on the thread,  I feel compelled to ask, since no one else had
>mentioned the article/device, is there something inherently limiting to the
>design or has it simply been overlooked by the participants in this thread?
>
>Am I preparing to build a pig-in-a-poke?  Could general improvements be
>made?  Has this been overlooked?
>


Chris,

Without a bit more study than I can do online, the major problem I see
is the use of clip leads for selecting taps.  Admittedly, using a switch
for this purpose would be complicated.

Another problem with tuners in general is that they usually do not include
any form of output measurement.  I have said this before, in theory there
are an infinite number of settings for networks with three or more variables
(like this one) that will give an input SWR of 1:1. Each combination has a
different loaded Q. The setting with the lowest loaded Q will be the most
efficient and have the widest matching bandwidth.

The best way to locate this combination is to use an output indicator and
adjust your network for both minimum input SWR and maximum output. For
this tuner I believe that you should keep the taps across as much of the coil
as you can and still achieve input match.

Have fun. Regards,

Wes  -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:19 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ferrite beads, antenna tuners
Date: 16 Oct 1995 00:24:26 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <45s8nq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-35.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Reich, Christopher N) writes:

;  I think I missed the original post, but I've been following the thread for
;  quite some time.  While I won't pretend to have understood all of what has
;  been discussed, I wish I had kept all that has transpired.
;
;  I have noticed on several occasions that participants have suggested that
;  the "right way to do it" would be to have an air-core coil providing a
;  link-coupled balanced output, and the tuning capacitor at the antenna side
;  should float, with no connection to ground or common.
;
;  Gentlemen, if you'll refer to your recent issues of the ARRL Handbook (mine
;  is 1991), in the chapter labelled 'Station Accessories', you'll find just
;  such a device described as "A Link-Coupled Matching Network".  I myself am
;  in the process of gathering the parts for the project.  After all that has
;  been said on the thread,  I feel compelled to ask, since no one else had
;  mentioned the article/device, is there something inherently limiting to the
;  design or has it simply been overlooked by the participants in this thread?
;
;  Am I preparing to build a pig-in-a-poke?  Could general improvements be
;  made?  Has this been overlooked?
;
;  73 - Chris WB2DYJ  [e-mail]

There have been a lot of words flying about in this thread, and I haven't read
more than a fraction of them, either. But link coupling has been mentioned. For
some reason(s), modern amateurs seem reluctant to use this method of coupling.

A link connected to the feedline (with no other connections, such as to ground)
does indeed accomplish the purpose of a balun: it forces the currents in the
conductors to be equal and opposite. And it does it in as straightforward manner
as possible. The current going in one end of the link has nowhere to go except
out the other end.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:20 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ferrite beads, antenna tuners
Date: 16 Oct 1995 06:06:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 44
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45tar5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Chris,

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Reich, Christopher N) writes:

>
>I have noticed on several occasions that participants have suggested that

>the "right way to do it" would be to have an air-core coil providing a
>link-coupled balanced output, and the tuning capacitor at the antenna
side
>should float, with no connection to ground or common.
>

Not only should the capacitors float, the inductor should float also. A
grounded link is fine though.

>Gentlemen, if you'll refer to your recent issues of the ARRL Handbook
(mine
>is 1991), in the chapter labelled 'Station Accessories', you'll find just

>such a device described as "A Link-Coupled Matching Network".  I myself
am
>in the process of gathering the parts for the project.  After all that
has
>been said on the thread,  I feel compelled to ask, since no one else had
>mentioned the article/device, is there something inherently limiting to
the
>design or has it simply been overlooked by the participants in this
thread?
>

I don't have that year, but the tuner in the 88 handbook looks good. The
only thing I do differently is "tapping" the link at three points, so I
can select high, medium or low Q (and impedance matching range). The lower
Q (more link turns) connection has MUCH higher efficiency, bandwidth, and
power handling capability. The higher Q (less link turns) position matches
wider load impedances.

I've always preferred the basic circuit used in Johnson Matchboxes
modified with floating capacitors and a tapped link because it is very
efficient and covers a wide load range with high power.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:21 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!freenet2.freenet.ufl.edu!afn17891
From: "Thomas W. Castle" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 04:13:40 -0400
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45j0vb$[e-mail]> <45ldr2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet2.afn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <45ldr2$[e-mail]>

In regards to the G5RV antenna, I've seen the typical specs;
which call for 29'6" of 300 ohm ladder <TV lead>...
I'm just wondering: the 450 ladder wire specs, I saw was
17' with the same 51' dipole legs dimensions.
This just doesn't sound right nor does it work out using the
formula I use to figure the 300 ohm.
Somewhere I missed the boat.???
What are the proper dimensions for a 10-80 meter G5RV using
450 ladder wire,  an do they recomend a 6-8 turn of the coax
where it connects to the ladder wire or is a balun preferred.

I have seen several varations of this antenna...
Tnx De Tom a.k.a. KD4QHH



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:22 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 14 Oct 1995 05:32:14 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <45ni0u$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45fepd$[e-mail]> <45gvmc$[e-mail]> <45j0vb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite200.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] wrote:
>In article <45j0vb$[e-mail]>, Grant Youngman <[e-mail]> writes:
>>[e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:
>>>In article <45fepd$[e-mail]>,
>>
[a whole buch of stuff deleted cuz my newsreader won't let me keep all of it]
>>
>>An excellent point here Grant and one that cannot be made enough.
>Anyone who reads the stuff by my favorite antenna author Kurt N Sterba will know that
>this is his favorite thing to write about. If one is using 450 ohm ladder line and has
>a remotely decent balanced tuner there is NO reason to worry about what the SWR is
>on the line. None. Zip.

This is an absolutely untrue myth. First of all, the losses of ladder line have been grossly
underestimated.  The loss charts in the ARRL manuals have been in error forever. Until that
is, I pointed it out to Dean Straw and he agreed to correct it in the latest printing of the
17th edition of the Antenna Book. Furthermore, almost everyone underestimates the losses in
antenna tuners.  In correspondence with ARRL, I cited examples where ladder-line, tuner
combinations could easily have over 10 dB of insertion loss, even with component Qs of
200-300. In addition, the operating bandwidth of these systems can be a few KHz on the lower
frequency bands. This is hardly operational convenience.

If you want to see an unattributed example of what I refer to, read the section "Highly
Reactive Loads" in the latest Antenna Book. (One nice thing about no attribution being given
is that the mathematical errors can't be blamed on me) Finding these is, as they say, left as
an exercise for the reader.


The losses on this line, or as Grant pointed out "real" open
>wire line are very negligable. Coax on the other hand can be quite lossy when used at
>high SWR. I have used the basic center fed dipole with ladder line and at 132 feet there
>is no real compromise. Also ladder line is not the pain-in-the-butt that everyone says
>it is. Every ham should have some ladder line around for antenna projects. Its good for
>feeding loops and other antennas. And loops are excellent choices.
>Well said old man!
>clarence wb0fdj

Yes, coax is quite lossy at high SWR in conjugate matched systems. But as I stated above,
until you actually compute ladder line loss, don't assume your assumption. Try running your
antenna on 160 meters, and report back to us.

Regards,

Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:23 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 16:19:32 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45fepd$[e-mail]> <45gvmc$[e-mail]> <45j0vb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <45ni0u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:

>The loss charts in the ARRL manuals have been in error forever. Until that
>is, I pointed it out to Dean Straw and he agreed to correct it in the
>latest printing of the 17th edition of the Antenna Book.

Wes, I just purchased the 16th edition on sale, so I guess I don't have
this information.  Would it be possible for you to post some of the
numbers here?

73 & tnx,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:24 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 15 Oct 1995 17:45:14 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <45rhba$[e-mail]>
References: <45ni0u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-12.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:

; [re the low loss of ladder line]. . .

;  This is an absolutely untrue myth. First of all, the losses of ladder line have been grossly
;  underestimated.  The loss charts in the ARRL manuals have been in error forever. Until that
;  is, I pointed it out to Dean Straw and he agreed to correct it in the latest printing of the
;  17th edition of the Antenna Book. Furthermore, almost everyone underestimates the losses in
;  antenna tuners.  In correspondence with ARRL, I cited examples where ladder-line, tuner
;  combinations could easily have over 10 dB of insertion loss, even with component Qs of
;  200-300. In addition, the operating bandwidth of these systems can be a few KHz on the lower
;  frequency bands. This is hardly operational convenience.

Some years ago, I measured the loss of TV twinlead and found it to be
reasonably low, although higher than the typical published numbers.
Until it got wet. Wet twinlead was lossier than RG 58 at 21 MHz, where
I did the measurements. Water is very lossy and has a high dielectric
constant, so it doesn't take much to make a real difference. In ladder
line, as in twinlead, the water can sit right where the field is
strongest, so it can have the most effect. Incidentally, the loss got
worse yet after the twinlead sat out for an extended period and got
dirty before the rain came along.

Anybody with a Bird wattmeter and a couple of transformers can repeat my
measurements with the ladder line of your choice. I encourage you to do
it and publish the results.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:25 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV question
Date: 17 Oct 1995 04:44:36 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <45vcbk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45fepd$[e-mail]> <45gvmc$[e-mail]> <45j0vb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <45ni0u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr2ip43.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>The loss charts in the ARRL manuals have been in error forever. Until that
>>is, I pointed it out to Dean Straw and he agreed to correct it in the
>>latest printing of the 17th edition of the Antenna Book.
>
>Wes, I just purchased the 16th edition on sale, so I guess I don't have
>this information.  Would it be possible for you to post some of the
>numbers here?

Jack, et al:

First, the paragraph cited above might lead one to believe that ALL of the lines (curves) on
the charts are incorrect.  This is not the case. Four hundred-fifty ohm ladder line was the
subject of my original post.

Frankly, I'm amazed that no one before me has noticed (or at least reported) this error.  By
inspection of the chart, it is obvious that the curve labeled "Open wire, 'Window' line" in
later versions and "Open wire, TV type" in earlier issues, has a different slope from any of
the other transmission  lines listed. In fact, if you project the curve lower in frequency, it
will intersect the curve for 600 ohm open wire and if you project it higher in frequency it
will intersect the coax curves.  Clearly, something is wrong.

I discovered this error when critically reviewing the article "Lure of the Ladder Line" in the
December 1993 issue of QST. The premise of that article was the same as some of the posts
here, ie, the line loss is low, so the SWR doesn't matter. This was a case of something
sounding to good to be true. You know what that means <g>. "Conventional wisdom" strikes
again.

I recalculated the loss using the following assumptions:

1. The line impedance really is 450 ohm. I don't know if this is true,
   I'm just assuming it to be.

2. The conductor diameter is 0.0403" (18 AWG) and the spacing is 1".

3. Given the above, an effective dielectric constant was calculated
   from:

         Eeff = 14400 * (acosh(D/d)^2)/Zo^2                  Eq 1

   therefore:   Eeff = 1.08
   where: D = 1 and d = .0403

Note: The ladder line construction is not homogeneous, some of the section is solid
dielectric, some is air, so this number is a "best guess" average.

4. The attenuation was computed from two equations:

         R = (0.2/d) F^0.5                                   Eq 2

and      A(db/100Æ) = 4.34 *(R/Zo)+2.78*F * Eeff^0.5 *pf     Eq 3

where: F is the freq. in MHz,
       and pf is the dielectric factor (approximated to 0.0001)

Equation 1 is a rearrangement of the familiar formula for
calculating the impedance of a two-wire line when the conductor
spacing and diameter and the dielectric constant are known. It and
equations 2 and 3 can be found in any edition of "Reference Data
for Radio Engineers"  This reference also gives a power factor for
polyethylene of <0.0002.  I guessed 0.0001 for the part air
condition.  In this case, the contribution is negligible.

Actually, if we pick nits, it does contribute to a slight imaginary term
in the line impedance.  This in turn affects the line loss at high
SWR. This was brought to light by Dean Straw, quoting Frank Witt, AI1H,
in a recent "Technical Correspondence" piece (Aug. 95). There was an
error in this article which was corrected in "Feedback" in the Oct.
issue.

Now the numbers:     Freq. (MHz)          Loss (dB/100Æ)
                                1                               0.048
                                4                               0.097
                                7                               0.129
                                10                              0.154
                                14                              0.183
                                18                              0.208
                                21                              0.225
                                28                              0.261
                                50                              0.353

As Roy has pointed out, these are for dry line. I would add,
these numbers donÆt include the effects of laying the line on
the roof, kinking it, running it thru the aluminum window sash,
wrapping it around a tree or coiling up the excess in the corner
of the shack <g>

Regards, Wes




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:27 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!news00.sunet.se!sunic!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Antenna Info
Date: 14 Oct 1995 09:34:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45oe8d$[e-mail]>
References: <45kpdq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45kpdq$[e-mail]>, cllane writes:

>Looking for info on GAP Antennas?
>Give them a call or drop them a note. They will be glad to answer any
>questions you may have.  Their address is as follows:
>
>GAP Antenna Products
>6010 N. Old Dixie Hwy.
>Vero Beach, Fl  32967

That should be an unbiased source of accurate data! And while youre at it,
ask OJ if he's innocent. ;-)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!cass.ma02.bull.com!uthscsa.EDU!MUENZLERK
From: [e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: gateway test
Date: 16 Oct 1995 19:09:30 -0000
Organization: Bull Worldwide Information Systems.
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cass.ma02.bull.com


cass.ma02.bull.com


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!dsi.unimi.it!berlioz.crs4.it!uthscsa.edu!MUENZLERK
From: [e-mail] ("Muenzler, Kevin")
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: gateway test
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 09:42 -0500 (CDT)
Organization: CRS4, Center for Adv. Studies, Research and Development in Sardinia
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: crs4gw.crs4.it
Originator: [e-mail]


crs4gw.crs4.it


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:29 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!dsi.unimi.it!berlioz.crs4.it!uthscsa.edu!MUENZLERK
From: [e-mail] ("Muenzler, Kevin")
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: gateway test
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 12:59 -0500 (CDT)
Organization: CRS4, Center for Adv. Studies, Research and Development in Sardinia
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: berlioz.crs4.it
Originator: [e-mail]


berlioz.crs4.it


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!gatech!news.eas.asu.edu!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Half Wave Line
Date: 15 Oct 1995 07:03:45 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <45qboh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


        John [e-mail] said that the terminating impedance
at the end of a half wave line "any line" will be repeated at half
wave intervals.
        This is true only of a lossless line.
        For example using his 450 ohm web line with a 50 ohm load
and the line having an attenuation constant of .11 dB/100 feet,
a velocity factor of .95 at 7 MHz will have an input impedance
at the first half wave point of 53.75 ohms resistive impedance.
        If you use a half wave line as a "measurement line",
assuming you prepareit properly, you must make the measurement
with an insstrument such as an RF Bridge etc.... then use a
Smith Chart or solve the transmission line equation to get the
true terminating impedance.  Using the smith chart or equation
in the "toward load" direction.
        Even then if you use the traditional and common transmission
line equations in most ham publications there will be a slight error
due to the fact that real transmission lines have a ssmall capacitive
reactance as part of their real complex Characteristic Impedance.
However this error will be small for low loss lines such as the
web line.
        The latest ARRL Antenna Book has software for taking this
complex Characteristic Impedance into account.

Charlie, W8//////// errir//// error  W7XC  (pardon the confusion,
this is my sixth call in 56 years
--



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:31 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Half Wave Line
Date: 15 Oct 1995 17:36:05 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <45rgq5$[e-mail]>
References: <45qboh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-12.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS) writes:

>       John [e-mail] said that the terminating impedance
>  at the end of a half wave line "any line" will be repeated at half
>  wave intervals.
>       This is true only of a lossless line.
>       For example using his 450 ohm web line with a 50 ohm load
>  and the line having an attenuation constant of .11 dB/100 feet,
>  a velocity factor of .95 at 7 MHz will have an input impedance
>  at the first half wave point of 53.75 ohms resistive impedance.
>       If you use a half wave line as a "measurement line",
>  assuming you prepareit properly, you must make the measurement
>  with an insstrument such as an RF Bridge etc.... then use a
>  Smith Chart or solve the transmission line equation to get the
>  true terminating impedance.  Using the smith chart or equation
>  in the "toward load" direction.

>. . .

I got burned by this some years ago. Charlie's absolutely right. One
reasonable question is, "How high does the loss have to be before I
need to worry about it?" This is a reasonable question, since the
equations for lossy lines are considerably more complex than for
lossless lines. The answer is that you can get a pretty bad error
when the loss is surprisingly low. If you're using a half-wave line
to measure a remote impedance, loss will always skew the measurement
toward the characteristic impedance of the line. (In the extreme case
of very lossy line, the impedance looking in will equal the line's
Z0 regardless of what's connected at the other end.) All else being
equal, use a measurement line of Z0 approximately equal to the load Z
being measured. But which would be better for measuring, say, 75
ohms -- a low-loss 450 ohm line or relatively high-loss 75 ohm coax?
For that, you'll have to do the calculations.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried the  DISCONE in 73 MAG ??
Date: 15 Oct 1995 10:52:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45r77n$[e-mail]>
References: <45l1rm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45l1rm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Michael K. Davis) writes:

>
>Hi:
>       That is not a discone.  I have not renewed my subscription to 73
>because of that article.  Wayne needs a real technical editor to sift out

>the garbage.
>
>

Michael,

I'm a little shocked at how many people actually trust 73 for anything
technical.
73 is the last place to look for reliable data on anything except
vacations and cruises.

But then, it does go hand in hand with Wayne's mentality of "Money over
substance". After all, he'd be happier than a pig in slop if the FCC threw
all the technical aspects of this hobby away and turned it into a big CB
band! When the owner plainly feels that the hobby is too technical, why
would anyone expect him to hire technically competent employees?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!usenet
From: Ray Martinez <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help with Homebrew 40M Bug Catcher Style Coil
Date: 15 Oct 1995 03:11:19 GMT
Organization: Texas Networking, Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <45pu4n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dnet043.sat.texas.net

I would like to make a 40M coil to make an 8' Bug Catcher antenna.
My reason for an 8' antenna is that I need to be able to store the
antenna in the trunk of my Volvo.  The reason for a Bug Catcher is
that I like the 12' version that I have on my truck.

What I need are the dimensions for a 40M load coil; number of turns,
wire size, spacing, etc.  My plan is to use a 4' mast, the loading
coil, a capacity hat, and a 3' whip.

Thanks for your help.

Ray Martinez
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!redstone.interpath.net!usenet
From: Luke Hamaty <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: help, TH3 conversion  to 12,17.30 M
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 01:31:37 -0400
Organization: Interpath -- Providing Internet access to North Carolina
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45kca7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kq4oq.pdial.interpath.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b1J (Windows; I; 32bit)

If you find out anything, let me know. I would like to have
17m on the one I am reconditioning.

If you don't need 20m coverage, it should be possible to get 17
by shortening the ends, and it shouldn't affect 15 and 10. I
don't have any measurements, though.

30m probably isn't practical. 12m could be done with additional
traps, but it wouldn't be easy.

I am considering adding a two-element 17m on the same boom
between the existing elements. I'm not sure how much it would
interact, but some preliminary calculations would seem to
suggest that it would not be a major problem. If I felt like it,
I could make the 2-element a 17/12 trap yagi, but I figure that,
by the time 12m gets really open, I'll be able to get my hands
on something like a Mosely that covers all 5, or an additional
A3WS or something like that.
        73 de KQ4OQ


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.nwnet.net!ns1.nodak.edu!news.uoknor.edu!ppp45
From: [e-mail] (Allen Rees)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELP..multi antenna on same tower
Date: 14 Oct 1995 23:44:48 GMT
Organization: University of Oklahoma
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <45pelu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp45.modems.uoknor.edu
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

My friend has a 6m, 2m beam and a 2m vertical antennas. He would like to put
them all on one tower. What spacing is  needed between the antennas.

This is an urgent request. If you have an answer please e-mail to
[e-mail].

73s, Allen.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!wa4mei!totrbbs!truman.boyle
From: [e-mail] (Truman Boyle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: hi bill
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Oct 95 01:13:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Top Of The Rock BBS Atl, GA 404-921-8687
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Truman Boyle)
Lines: 8

hi bill just thought i would say hi   jimmy crump said to give
him a call   this is the second message i have left you
truman boyle

----
Top Of The Rock BBS - Lilburn, GA
Phone: [phone]             Snailmail: 4181 Wash Lee Ct.
Lilburn, GA 30247-7440


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:37 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!van-bc!io.org!torfree!ai641
From: [e-mail] (Gary Chiasson)
Subject: How many coaxial cable manufacturers?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 03:03:26 GMT
Lines: 7

How many and what manufacturers are there that make coaxial cables?
I know there is Belden, Andrews, Carol (General), CQ (Wireman).
Any others?

G.C.




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.telalink.net!uro!jackatak!root
From: [e-mail] (Jack GF Hill)
Subject: Re: How many coaxial cable manufacturers?
Organization: Jack's Amazing CockRoach Capitalist Ventures
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 12:35:03 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (System nerd)
Lines: 24

[e-mail] (Gary Chiasson) writes:

> How many and what manufacturers are there that make coaxial cables?
> I know there is Belden, Andrews, Carol (General), CQ (Wireman).
                          ^^^^^^^
we have a similar company named "Andrew" they make great hardline and
connectors.

Also, Time Wire and Cable.

> Any others?
Consolidated

and many others who make cables you would want to use for RF... ;^)
--
73,
Jack, W4PPT/M (75M SSB 2-letter WAS #1657/#1789 -- both from the mobile! ;^)

+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
| Jack GF Hill        |Voice: [phone] -             Ham Call: W4PPT |
| P. O. Box 1685      |Modem: [phone] -  Bicycling and SCUBA Diving |
| Brentwood, TN  37024|Fax:   [phone] -          Life Member - ARRL |
| [e-mail]  - "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose" |
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:39 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!vectorbd!jpll
From: [e-mail] (Jim Lill)
Subject: Re: How many coaxial cable manufacturers?
Organization: Vector Board BBS
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 00:33:28 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 31

Jack GF Hill ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (Gary Chiasson) writes:

: > How many and what manufacturers are there that make coaxial cables?
: > I know there is Belden, Andrews, Carol (General), CQ (Wireman).
:                           ^^^^^^^
: we have a similar company named "Andrew" they make great hardline and
: connectors.

: Also, Time Wire and Cable.

: Consolidated

Add:

Saxton (or is it Saxon)?

Essex

ITT/Suprenant (if they're still around)

Microdot (small stuff, if they're still around)

Amphenol (they used to be)


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Lill      [e-mail]       wa2zkd@wb2psi.#wny.usa.na
PGP Key fingerprint =  AB 0B EF A8 E1 DD 5D E7  47 59 AF F5 67 F5 F9 62



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:40 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Josh Stark )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Is Their such a thing as a 2m and a 70cm antenna
Date: 15 Oct 1995 16:22:47 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <45rcgn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-wh4-27.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Oct 15  9:22:47 AM PDT 1995

    I would like to know if their is such a thing as a 2m and 70cm
antenna in one. Thank you


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gryphon.phoenix.net!dial2.phoenix.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Lewis Stephens KC5PSX)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Is Their such a thing as a 2m and a 70cm antenna
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 12:13:48 -0500
Organization: Amber,Inc.
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45rcgn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial2.phoenix.net
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0.1

In article <45rcgn$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Josh Stark ) wrote:

>     I would like to know if their is such a thing as a 2m and 70cm
> antenna in one. Thank you


Sure is, I use one for both home and mobile operation.  I use a ODO ground
plane and a MFJ mobile.  The Antenna Handbook will also help you build one
if you want.

Lewis
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

Lewis Stephens KC5PSX [e-mail] Pasadena,Texas

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!portal.gmu.edu!mason2.gmu.edu!cshelton
From: [e-mail] (Carroll J Shelton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Isotron Ant
Date: 16 Oct 1995 14:11:38 GMT
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <45tp6q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mason2.gmu.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

If anyone has contact info for the makers of the "Isotron"
limited space antennas, please post here or e-mail me.  I
belive the outfit that makes these is called "Belial" or
something like that.  These antennas, as I recall, were
basically a kind of loop that also included a loading coil,
and were made in band specific versions for each of the HF
bands, including the WARC bands.

If you have the address or phone number for these folks,
it would be a big help to me.
      Thanks - Jeff Shelton/KS4TL
                [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!purdue!yuma!lamar.ColoState.EDU!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Watts)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Isotron Ant
Date: 16 Oct 1995 10:58:32 -0600
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <45u2vo$[e-mail]>
References: <45tp6q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lamar.acns.colostate.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Carroll J Shelton ([e-mail]) wrote:
: If anyone has contact info for the makers of the "Isotron"
: limited space antennas, please post here or e-mail me.  I
: belive the outfit that makes these is called "Belial" or
: something like that.  These antennas, as I recall, were
: basically a kind of loop that also included a loading coil,
: and were made in band specific versions for each of the HF
: bands, including the WARC bands.
: If you have the address or phone number for these folks,
: it would be a big help to me.
:       Thanks - Jeff Shelton/KS4TL
:                 [e-mail]

Bilal Company
719-687-0650
137 Manchester Dr.
Florissant, CO 80816

I have the 160m version, and I was able to expand the <2:1SWR
bandwidth with a transformer.  I like it!
Galen, KF0YJ



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!mhv.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: K6STI loop antenna
Date: 17 Oct 1995 01:30:27 GMT
Organization: MHVNet, the Mid Hudson Valley's Internet connection
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <45v0vj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.161.119.240
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

In what mhat month QST is the K6STI low-noise contest loop article? I have the sinking feeling it's the one my daughter fed to
the trash disposal...  :(

Could someone forward the details, please? Thanks.

73, Greg

Greg Becker NA2N
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.ucalgary.ca!ume!zabrodsk
From: Rick Zabrodski <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: K6STI low noise lop question
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 19:57:24 -0600
Organization: The University of Calgary
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951015193039.26845A-100000@ume>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @ume.med.ucalgary.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: zabrodsk@ume

I get my QST second hand so my apologies if this has already been discussed.
I read the Sept 95 QST article with interest. My 65 foot shunt loaded
tower works well as a transmitting vertical on 160 and 80. It is the best
antenna for these bands that I have found for getting my qrp signal out
of my city lot.  Noise is a problem at times so I am very interested in
trying out this particular small, horizantal loop.

My question:  Why the obsession with coaxial feed lines?

Seems to me this is a balanced antenna and balanced feeders hooked up to
one of my home brew link coupled tuners or my z match tuner should remove
all this 52 ohm SWR neurosis that so many hams seem to have.
If somebody can ask K6STI or W6KUT about this or has an opinion as to why
I am wrong....please let me know.  Regardless, I will press on and build
it, putting the prototype version a few feet above the roof, hopefully
before the snow comes and stays.  450 ohm line sans coax that is!
BTW....seems to me that transmitting on the antenna with balanced lines
should also work  on multiple bands although it obviously will likely not
radiate well in the low angle department if low to the gound.
So, before I re invent the wheel with my nec wires or eznec program, has
anybody modelled this design to see what happens with the higher bands?

Dr. Rick Zabrodski BSc, MD, CCFP(E)    *                 VE6GK
Clinical Assistant Professor           *   NorCal 519  ARCI 7650  GQRP 8329
Faculty of Medicine, Univ. of Calgary  *  "Power is no substitute for skill"




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us!SABINW
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: link coupling
Date: 16 Oct 1995 12:43:03 GMT
Organization: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Cedar Rapids, IA,  52401
Lines: 2
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45tk0n$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us

A Faraday shield would also be helpful.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: More antenna fun.
Date: 13 Oct 1995 18:30:41 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <45mb8h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip123.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:20585 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11149 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16559

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>
>   BRETSKI <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>So I brought the thing in this AM to work and used our iron which
>>goes to 850+ F. That did a GREAT job. It all flowed together
>>nicely.
>     << snip >>
>>BRET A. PENNINGTON / COMPUTER TECHNICIAN  /EARTH AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
>
>Wow, that's really hot!  What kind of computers do you use that on?
>
>73,
>
>Jack  WB3U

Trashed 80's of course!!!



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need design for helical wound 40 meter vertical
Date: 14 Oct 1995 09:30:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 52
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45oe2j$[e-mail]>
References: <45k33e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45k33e$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

>I tried this back in 1974 or so.  It worked rotten.  Later I found out
that
>there
>are several different compounds that are used in plastic pipe.  It is
rumored
>
>that if you use some of them, the losses skyrocket and you wind up being
>an unhappy camper!
>
>Years later, somewhere I think I read that if you chunk a piece of the
stuff
>you want to use into a microwave and it gets hot, you know not to use
that
>particular material.
>
>When I built mine, I just started out with a quarter wave long chunk of
wire,
>
>wound it up over the full length of the pole I had, then started snipping
off
>
>wire and so on until it got reasonant the way I wanted it.  Real cut and
try.
>
>Since it worked poorly over my lossy form, I gave up without returning
for
>more experiments.  However, if you use a good bamboo pole, a fiberglass
pole
>such as a pole vault pole reject, or something tht really is a good form,
you
>
>should be OK.  I figured out you pick the pole, wind wire on it to suit
for
>test
>then when you get it down to where you want it, to do it all up with bond

>sealant to keep it in place and, poof, you're in!
>
>

Perhaps the problem stemmed from the fact that all helical loaded antennas
have very poor efficiency compared to other loading schemes?

I go along with the earlier comment that recommended using a whip and a
loading coil.
A center or top loaded vertical would provide reduced loss and higher
radiation resistance (which even increases the efficiency of the grounding
system), so why not use one? Plus a more traditional lumped loaded antenna
is easier to use on multi-bands.
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!bcarh189.bnr.ca!brtph500.bnr.ca!corpgate!ixc.ixc.net!news
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need plans - 2 mtr beam
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 17:45:13 GMT
Organization: Internet Exchange Carrier
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <45ot5p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm1-50.ixc.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.46

  Hi ... looking for plans for easy to build , 7 - 11 el. 2mtr beam.
 key words are easy to build ... prefer 50 ohm coax fed , vertical ,
 w/ simple balun design , if any needed.
                          Thanx in advance!      N3NDQ - JIM
                                ( reply to Yamaha @ IXC.NET)



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!server2.rz.uni-leipzig.de!news.uni-jena.de!prakinf2.PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need plans - 2 mtr beam
Date: 16 Oct 1995 09:48:00 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <45t9og$[e-mail]>
References: <45ot5p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>  Hi ... looking for plans for easy to build , 7 - 11 el. 2mtr beam.
> key words are easy to build ... prefer 50 ohm coax fed , vertical ,
> w/ simple balun design , if any needed.

Jim,

If you look at it closely, you will realize that such a beam
does not really exist. A well designed  10 ele beam is
3.70 to 4.40 meters long and has a gain of 11 to 12 dBd.
Now, for vertical polarization you have to mount it on a
fibreglass pole and bring th feed out *behind*
the reflector. A better alternative would be to stack
to shorter beams side by side. Neither is strictly
speaking "easy to build"!

The only easy solution is to use a  fore-mast mounted shorter yagi or quad
but you have to expect at least 2 or 3 dB less gain, which should be still
OK for most applications, where vertical polarization is called for.

73, Moritz DL5UH



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!wizard.pn.com!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!lab35.cs.purdue.edu!schlacjs
From: [e-mail] (Jason Schlachet)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Portable 2m J-pole?
Date: 16 Oct 1995 12:47:02 GMT
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <45tk86$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lab35.cs.purdue.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I once head mention of a portable 2m j-pole made from ladder line. Does such
a design exist? If so, can somebody email me ([e-mail]) the
design and/or pointers?

Thanks

73 de Jason, KE6UUU
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 "For millions of years, Mankind lived just like the animals. Then something
 happened which unleashed the power of our imagination. We learned to talk."
     -- Pink Floyd, "Keep Talking" from Division Bell                 KE6UUU
----------------------------------------------------------- Jason S Schlachet


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!shore!northshore.shore.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Michael Crestohl)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: PRODUCT REVIEW: SMARTBRIDGE SOFTWARE FOR PALOMAR R-X NOISE BRIDGE
Date: 15 Oct 1995 21:26:07 -0400
Organization: North Shore Access; a service of Eco Software, Inc.
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <45scbf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: northshore.ecosoft.com
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:20548 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16532

PRODUCT REVIEW: SMARTBRIDGE for PALOMAR ENGINEERS' R-X NOISE BRIDGE

Recently I posted a product review of the PALOMAR ENGINEERS' R-X Noise
Bridge.  SmartBridge is a program that allows you to measure antenna
impedance and SWR using data obtained from the R-X bridge and provide an
analysis.  The main advantage using SmartBridge is that you can take
measurements at the input end of the feed line instead of having to
connect the R-X Bridge directly to the antenna terminals.

Since the measurements are to be taken at the transmitter end of the
transmission line, it should be obvious that the characteristics of that
line must be taken into consideration.  Smartbridge takes you through
a characterization process of the transmission line you are using with
this antenna.  Now, you can use SmartBridge from inside your shack to
compute the actual impedance and SWR just about every antenna, from the
lowly dipole to log periodics.  However, the feedline must be co-axial
cable.

In order to make transmission line measurements you will need to make up
a few simple test adapters (which are not supplied with either the R-X
NOISE BRIDGE or the SmartBridge software).  These are very simple to
make - you'll need a couple of SO-239 and PL-259 connectors,  couple of
100 Ohm resistors, etc.  Once this is done you are equipped with a powerful
and extremely useful antenna measurements tool.

Here's how it works:  once your transmission line characteristics have
been defined and entered all you have to do is enter your noise bridge
measurements in a familiar, spreadsheet-type screen.  Results can be graphed
on the screen and printed for future reference and comparison.  Also,
many different transmission line characteristic data can be saved for use
later.

As with the PALOMAR ENGINEERS' R-X Noise Bridge, I found SmartBridge
an extremely useful adjunct to help to keep my antenna technical files
up-to-date and meaningful.  I have seen the antenna/swr analyzers available
for substantially more than the cost of both the noise bridge and SmartBridge
software together ($110.00) .  I wonder what they can do that this pair
from PALOMAR ENGINEERS can't?

%T      SmartBridge
%A      C. Fisher
%I      PALOMAR ENGINEERS
%C      PO Box 462222, Escondido  CA  92046  619-747-3343
%D      1993
%O      $29.95


(C) 1995
Michael Crestohl
Nahant Massachusetts  USA
[e-mail]

DISCLAIMER:  I have no interest, financial or otherwise, in the success or
failure of the book or materials reviewed herewith, nor have I received any
compensation (other than a review copy requested by me) from anyone who has.
All opinions expressed are strictly my own.

Other Internet and Aviation book/software reviews by me can be obtained
by anonymous FTP from:  x2ftp.oulu.fi in the /pub/books/crestohl directory.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:53 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!sunic!news99.sunet.se!news.chalmers.se!etek.chalmers.se!mwmac8.nt.chalmers.se!user
From: [e-mail] (Martin Johansson)
Subject: Q:Resistive-film company named FilmOhm (Solitron/Microwave)?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Organization: Chalmers University
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0.1
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 17:16:58 +0100
Lines: 25

NB: Posted for <mailto:[e-mail]>
Please respond by e-mail to this address!
The person asking the question does not have
access to Usenet.

Q:
Once upon a time there was a company called FilmOhm that
produced resistive film (ie "Ohm-per-square" materials).
They were bought by a company called Solitron/Microwave.
This company advertised in Microwave Journal up to Dec 1988.
After this I have lost the trace of them.
Does anybody know what happened?
*) Do they still exist, but under another name?
*) Is there anyone else that manufactures these resistive
films nowadays?

Thanks,

Joakim

--
Martin Johansson                     | 'There is no hell,
Dept. Microwave Techn., Chalmers U.  |  only France.' (FZ)
S-41296 Gothenburg, Sweden           | Fax:   [phone]
E-mail:  [e-mail]     | Phone: [phone]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!mc3.mcnet.ch!mcnet.ch!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Cedric Baechler HB9HFN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R5 or R7
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 18:39:34 GMT
Organization: HB9HFN
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <27GM5y$00Z@hb9hfn>
References: <45gum1$[e-mail]> <45h6pp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cbaechle.dial.mcnet.ch
X-Newsreader: TRN 1.97 w/NNTP (beta) for OS/2

In article <45h6pp$[e-mail]>,
Robert G. Strickland <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] wrote:

>>In article <45bvto$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jen Wood) writes:
>>>I am thinking of buying a R5 or R7 vertical antenna.  If anyone out there
>>>has one, or has had one, could you please tell me what you thought of it,
>>>like the pros and cons of it.
>Harold...

>I used an R5 for about two years. It was mounted on my chimney, just
>over the roof - about 30ft. I worked 150ish countries with 100 watts.
>i think it is a fine antenna. Don't know about the R7, but would guess
>that it's also okay, also. Good luck with either.

Hello!

I own the R7 and am very happy with it. In a year I worked more than 200
countries (most in CW) with my FT1000 and 200 watts. Recently I bought a
linear and blew the 18 MHz trap running about 700 watts. The manufacturer
here in Switzerland changed it as it was still under garantie.
The bandwidth of the R7 is as claimed, a bit narrow on 40/20m but without
radials it's a good compromise. I had it installed on a balconey and now
on a mast at about 10'.

I would recommand the R7 as the 40/30m bands are nice to have with the low solar flux we now have.

cu! 73 de Cedric HB9HFN --- running verticals only ---


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:55 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!warwick!nott-cs!news
From: [e-mail] (Dave Bullock)
Subject: re birds
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: frankpc.not-ihr.mrc.ac.uk
Organization: ihr
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 12:13:27 GMT
Lines: 6

I sympathise - my nest of 6m, 2m, 70cms and 23cms aerials were a favourite
with the starlings until I put a plastic eagle owl up there too!
Trouble is that I really need to make it come and go 'cos 7 months later
they sit on its head and mess on mine!

Dave G6UWO


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.netropolis.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Robert M. Bratcher Jr.)
Subject: Rombic antenna questions
Message-ID: <a117cb$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 19:03:40 GMT
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 12
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:64999 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16594

I recently moved to the country on 90 acres of land about 100 miles
northwest of Houston Texas. I have built longwire antennas up to 3
acres in length and once a couple of V beams on 5 acres. Now that I
have more land available I want to build several rombic antennas. My
reciever is an R-390a. How long can each antenna be before the radio
overloads on strong stations? I do listen to some of those but also
the weaker stations. Are there any books other than the ARRL handbook
that cover this antenns in detail? By the way, I will be feeding them
with homemade ladder line also known as open wire feed at about 4 inch
spacing. I would also like to hear from anyone that has used this type
of antenna.




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:57 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: Rooftop coupling distance for verticals
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <45c38l$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 01:26:53 GMT
Lines: 22

In article <45c38l$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] wrote:
>I am planning to mount a Butternut vertical at rooftop level
>but am concerned that the proximity of a 20' metal mast with a
>vhf/uhf vertical on it (approx. 8-10' away from only available
>site on the roof) might seriously affect the performance of the
>HF vertical.  What kind of distance should I try to keep between
>the vertical and the metal mast if possible?  Thanks.
>Bill KB8USZ  [e-mail]
---------------------------------------------------------------
20 feet away is plenty, IF the mast is not close to a resonant length.  One
way to tell is to put up the Butternut and measure the SWR on all bands, then
take down the other mast and measure the SWR again.  If it has no effect on
SWR, you're ok.  If it does... go to plan B (whatever that is).

Even if there is some change in SWR, the main difference will be in changing
the pattern, not changing the overall efficiency.  You will have created a
sort-of-Yagi with the two masts.  Who knows, it might even be better!


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:58 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!fido.asd.sgi.com!news.neu.sgi.com!eugate.sgi.com!imaginet.fr!rain.fr!world-net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Sierra
Date: 16 Oct 1995 10:11:24 GMT
Organization: World-Net information exchange, Internet provider.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <45tb4c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: client84.sct.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

I'll like to get documentation about Sierra Antenna.

Thank you




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:04:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!maw.montana.com!news
From: [e-mail] (bowman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 14 Oct 1995 06:38:24 GMT
Organization: Montana Online
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <45nlt0$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ptm15.montana.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16490 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11095

In article <45jjuu$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Woody Harper) says:
>
>Ok, here's a newbie question for today.
>
>in the antenna is an SO-239 panel mount connector. The author of the
>article claims that the connector must be silver plated as nickel plating
>will not work.

i haven't seen this particular article. is it the deal where you solder
the 1/4 wave vertical in the conductor pin, and 4 radials in the mounting
holes of the connector?

if so, the only problem is soldering to the connector shell. it can be done.
use a file to cut through the chrome layer of the plating, clean the area
well, and use a lot of paste flux. i use a propane torch to solder. unless
you have a BIG soldering iron, the connector will suck out so much heat that
the cheap plastic insultation will melt down. get right in there with the
blue cone of the torch, hit it with plenty of solder, and cool it with a
wet rag or sponge before doing the next corner.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:00 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 14 Oct 1995 05:04:16 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <45ngcg$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45ljcm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite200.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16502 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11103

[e-mail] wrote:

[snip]

>I was thinking of trying one of these but replacing the ground-radials with
>a miniature actual ground plane.  I've got a bulkhead BNC feedthrough that
>I'm going to install in a pie-plate.  The pie-plat won't be a tuned
>ground-wire, but it also won't poke me & will provide better near-field
>shielding: I'm going to mount it on a pack-frame (with an adjustable lift)
>for either/both/one-each my HT and cell-phone.  I got the idea from
>someone who said they used a magmount rubber-ducky antenna on the
>dinning room table with a pie-plate.


In the "good ol' days" back in 1960 something, we used to acquire aluminum transcription disks
from radio and TV stations and use them for ground planes for two meter verticals. As I
recall, these were about 16" in diameter with a hole in the middle that could be enlarged for
a (gasp) SO-239. These were ALL silver-plated in those days <g>. I even used one as a GP in my
1956 Corvette (how I wish I had that back, sigh)

Regards,

Wes -- N7WS




From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:01 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 15 Oct 1995 14:23:22 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <45r5gq$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip045.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16515 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11116

        Although in this case it does not apply...

        There is some Mil-spec that I haven't memorized ;) deeming that only silver
plated connectors will be used at uhf frequencies. The iron content of the nickel plate
causes some magnetic problems.
        Can some clear this up? I cannot recall the source or the details.

        Jim     N7TCF


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!clue.callamer.com!biggulp.callamer.com!cbuttsch
From: Clifford Buttschardt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 09:56:49 -0700
Organization: CallAmerica, San Luis Obispo CA USA
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45ljcm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <45ngcg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: biggulp.callamer.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
NNTP-Posting-User: cbuttsch
In-Reply-To: <45ngcg$[e-mail]>
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16523 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11124

Wes, those old transcription disks were just superb as ground planes!
Living near the ocean, we rapidly found the vinyl coating superb, but the
ability to survive a wind storm somewhat questionable! 73 Cliff  W6HDO


On 14 Oct 1995, Wes Stewart wrote:

> [e-mail] wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >I was thinking of trying one of these but replacing the ground-radials with
> >a miniature actual ground plane.  I've got a bulkhead BNC feedthrough that
> >I'm going to install in a pie-plate.  The pie-plat won't be a tuned
> >ground-wire, but it also won't poke me & will provide better near-field
> >shielding: I'm going to mount it on a pack-frame (with an adjustable lift)
> >for either/both/one-each my HT and cell-phone.  I got the idea from
> >someone who said they used a magmount rubber-ducky antenna on the
> >dinning room table with a pie-plate.
>
>
> In the "good ol' days" back in 1960 something, we used to acquire aluminum transcription disks
> from radio and TV stations and use them for ground planes for two meter verticals. As I
> recall, these were about 16" in diameter with a hole in the middle that could be enlarged for
> a (gasp) SO-239. These were ALL silver-plated in those days <g>. I even used one as a GP in my
> 1956 Corvette (how I wish I had that back, sigh)
>
> Regards,
>
> Wes -- N7WS
>
>
>
>


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:04 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 16 Oct 1995 05:58:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45tace$[e-mail]>
References: <45r5gq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45r5gq$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:

>       There is some Mil-spec that I haven't memorized ;) deeming that
only silver
>plated connectors will be used at uhf frequencies. The iron content of
the
>nickel plate
>causes some magnetic problems.
>       Can some clear this up? I cannot recall the source or the details.
>
>       Jim     N7TCF
>
>

I believe that to be untrue in the practical world, Jim. The magnetic
effects are Zilch at high frequencies because of eddy currents, although
losses in nickel are definately higher. But the connector is so short and
has so much outer surface area I can't honestly believe anyone would ever
remotely notice a difference in amateur applications. If someone was that
fussy, they'd use a 50 ohm connector like a BNC or type N anyway! Sounds
like folklore to me.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:04 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news5.ner.bbnplanet.net!news3.near.net!monk.proteon.com!jfw
From: [e-mail] (John Woods)
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: kerplop.proteon.com
Organization: Proteon, Inc., Westborough, Ma.
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45ljcm$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 14:45:34 GMT
Lines: 11
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16549 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11141

[e-mail] () writes:
>Quite simply the answer is, that the author does not know, what he is
>talking about. Surely the silver plated connector has less loss,

Even this isn't necessarily true.  Apparently one sometimes finds
(relatively) cheap silver-plated coax connectors where the manufacturer
didn't bother polishing the underlying metal first (which is a more
expensive step than a thin silver layer!), and the resulting rough
surface ends up having more loss than a (polished) nickel surface.
(Source: "The Radioman", at a talk given at the Boxboro Convention
a couple of years ago.)


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 16 Oct 1995 14:53:00 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <45trkc$[e-mail]>
References: <45jjuu$[e-mail]> <45r5gq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16551 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11142

[e-mail] wrote:
>       Although in this case it does not apply...
>
>       There is some Mil-spec that I haven't memorized ;) deeming that only silver
>plated connectors will be used at uhf frequencies. The iron content of the nickel plate
>causes some magnetic problems.

The Andrew catalog has some information. Seems that if you run
the legal limit, you can generate IMD products around 120 dB down.
I don't consider this something worth worrying about.

Zack KH6CP/1

BTW, I never had trouble soldering nickel plated Amphenol
connectors--with shiny new connectors I don't even
file or polish them. I made a whole bunch of antennas like
this for a July 1991 QST article.



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 17 Oct 1995 06:55:21 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46022p$[e-mail]>
References: <45tace$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

>>>Even this isn't necessarily true.  Apparently one sometimes finds
(relatively) cheap silver-plated coax connectors where the manufacturer
didn't bother polishing the underlying metal first (which is a more
expensive step than a thin silver layer!), and the resulting rough
surface ends up having more loss than a (polished) nickel surface.
(Source: "The Radioman", at a talk given at the Boxboro Convention
a couple of years ago.)<<<

Why is any of this important? Please explain:

1.) The connector is so short in terms of WL, why are the losses
important?

2.) The losses in the center conductor are where the current is more
concentrated, so why is the plating on the large diameter low current
density shell important? Explain why manufacturers get away with woven
braid (talk about rough) or aluminum conductors on the outside of some
very low loss RF cables!

3.) Am I now to understand low current density outer conductors must be
polished to remove minute surface imperfections *in the connector* or the
losses go up a measurable amount? Yet I can accept the use of braided
shield cables? That doesn't make a bit of sense to me. Or does this
"Radioman" sell cable with the inner shield polished to a mirror finish to
match his polished connectors???

4.) The impedance bump caused by sticking a 25 to 35 ohm UHF type
connector in a 50 ohm line causes more of a problem than the surface
resistance of the outer conductor ever could (unless it were carbon, hi).

Hey, don't worry about losses! The ONLY practical difference the plating
makes is in the solderability and corrosive effects. The losses in the
connector (other than those caused by the impedance bump at UHF) are so
low if we tripled them they would still be nil. And if anyone (or the
application) is that critical, he ought to be put away for life in Radio
Prison for using a UHF style connector in the first place! ;-)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:08 1995
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Rogich)
Subject: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: 17 Oct 95 15:54:46 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: TheMicrosoftNetwork(msn.com)
Lines: 39


I struggling what to do:

 Here's the situation:

 I have a lot where I can run a 70 foot(max) lenght of wire between
trees. Right now
I can only get the rope up about 25feet on the trees, but will have
someone with
climbing shoes raise it up to 50-60 feet soon.

 The lot has a slope to it and the soil is shale and sand (poor conductivity).
The antenna today is on the highest part of the slope but the next
building lot the ground does raise up another 8-12 feet or so.

 Today I have a 40 meter dipole up (no balun) with rg58. The wire
runs Northwest to
Southeast. It seems to work ok on 40 with 500W hp rig. Howbrew tuner,
I can also run
on 15 and top end of 20 meters.

 I would like to pick up 80 meter capability and decent DX capability
on 15 meters.

 Part of the feedline might have to run on or under the ground due to
a walkway being
between the antenna and the shack.

 Ideas ?

 1. Is there a shortened Carolina Windom available with loading coils ?
 2. Use an all band dipole with open feedline (but what lenght
feedline do I need before
I can get it to where I have to run it along the ground ?

 Any suggestions welcome.

 Thanks
 Jerry Rogich - aa2t


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:09 1995
From: [e-mail] (Luke Hamaty)
Subject: RE: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: 17 Oct 95 17:03:48 -0700
References: <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: TheMicrosoftNetwork(msn.com)
Lines: 17

It's OK to let the ends of the antenna droop. Make the wire 90-120'
long and let 15-20ft. droop. The length is not critical, but it is
probably better for it NOT to be resonant on any band, so it won't be
precisely 1/2 multiple on any band either. The droop will change the
response a little, but a real wire in real trees isn't so predictable
anyway.

If the distance from the tuner to the point where you have to go
underground isn't more than about 20', just run 300 or 450 ohm
twinlead to there. Another thing you could try is a G5RV variant of
some sort. There was one in QST last month or two that I am planning
to try that is 94 feet long with forty-something feet of 450
twinlead, then RG8X the rest of the way. In my view, the point of
that is not to avoid the tuner, but to keep the SWR on the coax down
to reduce losses. It will still have a pretty substantial SWR on the
coax on 75m, but the losses are less of a problem at that freq.
anyway.


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: 17 Oct 1995 17:23:27 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <460oqf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: misz.animal.uiuc.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jerry Rogich) writes:
>
>I struggling what to do:
>
> Here's the situation:
>
> I have a lot where I can run a 70 foot(max) lenght of wire between
>trees. Right now
>I can only get the rope up about 25feet on the trees, but will have
>someone with
>climbing shoes raise it up to 50-60 feet soon.

I have a similar situation. My 40m dipole is set at about 30ft and fed
by the ladder line. I use it all bands (160-10) with the MFJ 1.5 KW
tuner.  The results are OK barefoot and distinctly better with a 400W
amplifier.  On 160m I worked the east and west coasts in the ARRL 160m
contest, both CW and SSB, but usually the coverage ends at about 500
miles. On 80m, I am able to work anyone I hear, including DX
stations, although not as the first one.  On 40 m the antenna works
best, as expected.  On 20m and up, a vertical delta at the same height
beats the dipole by 1-3S.

The key to use the shortened antenna is a heavy-duty antenna
tuner.Initially, my MFJ 962C sparked at the band switch on 80 at 400W.
After replacing the switch and insulating the switch bolts, there were
no further problems.

In your situation, it may make sense to lengthen the antenna by
letting the ends drop vertically.

Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Illinois      1207 W. Gregory Dr., Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. [phone]         Fax: [phone]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:11 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Source for EHS guy wire?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 01:18:39 GMT
Lines: 8

Can anyone recommend a source for 3/16 galvanized EHS guy wire?  Need about
1000 feet.

Thanks,


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:12 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!mac78.franklin
From: [e-mail] (Nelson P. Moyer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TH11DXS or 2010?
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 11:55:11 -0600
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Lines: 11
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Nelson P. Moyer)
NNTP-Posting-Host: mac78.uhl.uiowa.edu
X-Newsreader: InterCon TCP/Connect II 1.2.1

I'm thinking about putting up a HyGain TH11DXS or the Cushcraft 2010. I read
the CQ review of the 2010 and it was favorable, but I have not seen any
reviews on the TH11DXS. Does anyone know of a review? Can anyone offer any
first hand experience with either antenna? I am particularly concerned about
icing of the 2010 and what effect it would have on the phasing harness. From
the pictures, it looks like it wouldn't take much ice to detune it. All
comments appreciated.






From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:13 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!redstone.interpath.net!usenet
From: Luke Hamaty <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Help!!!!
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 01:24:30 -0400
Organization: Interpath -- Providing Internet access to North Carolina
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kq4oq.pdial.interpath.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b1J (Windows; I; 32bit)

Charles D. Lowery wrote:
>
> I am erecting a Rohn 64 foot self supporting tower and need
> some information.  I used to have only a A3 tribander on top at
> the last QTH but want to stack the A3, a 6 element six meter
> beam, a 11 element 2 meter beam, and a 10 element 440 beam on
> top.
That's a lot! Better be sure of the wind-load for both the tower
and the rotor. Wouldn't want the tower to blow down!

> The rotop sets about six feet inside the tower
> leaving about 9 feet to work with above the
> tower for the antennas.  Is this enough and what spacing will
> allow for the least interaction?
Check the rotor manual on that, too. Mine says no more than
6ft. above the thrust bearing, but it is not real heavy-duty.

I would not expect much interaction between beams that are on
different bands like that. Some designs interlace elements,
for example, for both 2m and 70cm on the same boom. You might
consider mounting the vhf beams side-by-side on a short cross-
boom. Seems like I see that a lot.
The structural issues are the most important though.

        73 de KQ4OQ


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Help!!!!
Date: 16 Oct 1995 05:49:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <45t9s0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Luke,

In article <[e-mail]>, Luke Hamaty
<[e-mail]> writes:

>I would not expect much interaction between beams that are on
>different bands like that. Some designs interlace elements,
>for example, for both 2m and 70cm on the same boom.

That's a particularly nasty combo. The two meter elements resonate at 450
in a third overtone mode. So while the 450 won't hurt the two meter, the
two meter kills 450 perfromance. The same thing applies at HF, a lower
band antenna can seriously affect the higher band antenna, especially if
they are full size harmonically related elements at an odd frequency
division. So he has major worries with the six meter antenna de-tuning the
2 meter and 450 antenna, and the 2 meter detuning the 450.

I'd put the A3 at the bottom, and the 450 antenna and two meter antennas
side by side spaced 4 feet or more apart on side arms (a cross boom or
horizontal mast) at the middle, with the six meter at the top.

>You might
>consider mounting the vhf beams side-by-side on a short cross-
>boom.

That's also a good idea with all three V/UHFside by side! It would be nice
if they were on small stubs above the cross boom so the support didn't get
stuck in line with the elements.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Updated WWW Site
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 95 15:56:35 PDT
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <NEWTNews.813970745.11764.amsoft@amsoft>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwbyppp123.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.swap:49424 rec.radio.shortwave:65001 rec.radio.scanner:39760 rec.radio.amateur.space:5511 rec.radio.amateur.policy:31539 rec.radio.amateur.misc:93331 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11169 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:20625 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:12298 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16595


The AmSoft web page "http://hamster.business.uwo.ca/~amsoft/" has
been reworked.  It is now the Mother of all WWW sites for Amateur
Radio.  Connect to over 125 ham sites direct from the front page.
New HTML work includes online forms, plenty of  color and lots of
FUN!  It could be addicting using our page.





From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:16 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.nwnet.net!serval.net.wsu.edu!unicorn.it.wsu.edu!sday
From: [e-mail] (Steve Day)
Subject: Velocity Factor
Sender: [e-mail] (News)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 00:03:11 GMT
Organization: Washington State University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 7

Does anyone know the velocity factor of RG8X-95 coax?

--
Steve Day                         |   This signature made with
N7VHY                             |   75% recycled pixels
Internet: [e-mail]            |
Packet:   n7vhy@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Phillip Perry)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What is the best 1296 antenna
Date: 16 Oct 1995 22:45:04 GMT
Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <45un9g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pperry.clark.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2

I am wanting to know what the best antenna is for 1296.  I live in an
appartment, so I need to keep things down to a low profile.  I am wanting
to take a good mobile antenna and put it on a ground plane, then mount it
just outside the window.  What do you think?

Best of 73,
Phillip Perry - N5QCN
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:18 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-ulm.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!deap1032
From: [e-mail] (Bruegemann)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is the best 1296 antenna
Date: 17 Oct 1995 18:29:25 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <460sm5$[e-mail]>
References: <45un9g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: servus11.rus.uni-stuttgart.de

>I am wanting
>to take a good mobile antenna and put it on a ground plane, then mount it
>just outside the window.  What do you think?

May be not the best idea. The vertical antenna will be in close proximity
to the wall, which will be lossy et.c., depending on the wx.
Also the radiation pattern and hence signal strengths will change
unpredictably.

May be a small yagi would be better and still "low profile". And you can
aim it.

73, Moritz DL5UH


From [e-mail] Tue Oct 17 16:05:19 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!My_PC
From: [e-mail] (Maria Forrest)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where do I put this antenna?
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 95 12:47:04 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <460alq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: maf.mindspring.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #1

A friend of mine gave me a Cushcraft R3 antenna to use for HF.  I'd like to put it up soon,
but I'm not sure how to go about doing that.  I'm in a rach-style house, and I though I might put
the antenna on the roof somewhere...can I buy standard antenna mounting stuff at Radio Shack
for this kind of thing?

Any other advice/comments would be welcome!

Thanks,

-maf


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: "Reactive current"
Date: 18 Oct 1995 06:18:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 81
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <462ka9$[e-mail]>
References: <45v0bp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <45v0bp$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

>
>The fact is, the current just doesn't care what you call zero time or
>phase. Good thing, too.
>
>What I've presented here is very simple circuit analysis. I hope that
>people with other points of view can also express them in simple terms
and
>not have to invoke esoteric principles. Or perhaps "reactive current" is
a
>much more complicated concept than I thought.
>
>73,
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL
>
>

Hi Roy,

I had this discussion with several people over the last few years. These
conversations always led me to believe "reactive current" is a confusing
area. Since we come from opposite ends of the street, my perspective is
more one of getting a good "feel" for what happens in real world circuits.
 Anyway, since I'm one step above the real Forrest Gump, I always try to
explain it like this:

Think about what happens in a resonant circuit with a parallel coil,
capacitor, and resistor driven by a fixed voltage source. As the loaded Q
goes up, so does the strength of the magnetic field in the coil, even with
the same applied voltage. The coil heating increases, the magnetic flux
level increases, the capacitor current losses go up. All the I sqrd R
losses in the loop formed by the coil and cap *increase*. But the current
in the resistor stays the same!

If we broke the connection between the high loaded-Q parallel coil and cap
and stuck a regular RF ammeter in line it would indicate much more current
than one ampere, but if we moved it outside of the resonant loop at the
connection to the generator it would indicate much lower current. It
doesn't matter what type of ammeter we use, it could sense current by
measuring voltage drop across a small resistance, or the magnetic flux
level generated by the current flowing in the circuit. The (cough)
"reactive" current acts just like current!

So all the "reactive" current related effects we observe in the resonant
loop of the tuned circuit are exactly like the "real" current increased.
The only difference is the voltage and current "don't happen at the same
time", so we can't multiply them together to get the power. If we did, we
would calculate a much higher power than really exists at the generator.

The voltage behaves exactly like expected for any "real" voltage (because
it is real), and current behaves exactly like expected for "real" current.
The voltage and current *effects* are independent. The result can be
exactly like one or both of them are increased at the same time. But we
can't forget they are increased at different times when compared to each
other!

In a properly adjusted simple base loaded vertical, the current and
voltage are in phase at the feedline. Let's say the current at that point
is one ampere, and the voltage is ten volts. At the antenna side of the
loading coil, the current must still remain one ampere. But current and
voltage at that point become out-of-phase.

The voltage at the antenna to coil connection becomes very high to force
one ampere into the high capacitive reactance of the antenna. If we just
multiply the voltage at that point times the current it "looks like" the
power is very high, but it is really only ten watts when the phase
difference is considered. The reactive voltage arcs just like real
voltage, and causes the same electric (not *electrostatic*) field strength
in volts/m. The only practical difference is voltage AND current can't be
multiplied together to calculate the "real" power since they are no longer
exactly in phase.

This is also why coupling increases in a link coupled circuit as the
loaded Q is increased. This is why a toroid in a resonant circuit
saturates and has more loss at the same "real" power level as the loaded
"Q" is increased. The flux level increases because the "reactive" current
increases, and the effect is the same as a "real" current increase.

"Reactive" current causes the same type of magnetic


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: "Reactive current" - correction
Date: 17 Oct 1995 19:51:18 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4611fm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx07-27.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

I'd like to thank Rhett George, KE4HIH for noticing the following
error in my posting about "reactive current":

>(If you got the wrong answer of 0.366 watts for A7 or A8, calculate the
>power using P = Re(VI*), where V is the voltage across the antenna
>terminals (371.8 + j0) and I* is 0.0995 + j0.995.)

371.8 + j0 is the voltage across the source, not the antenna terminals,
so using it for V in P = Re(VI*) gives the power delivered by the source,
which is 37 watts. The voltage across the antenna terminals is 3.68 - j 36.82
= 37 /_ -84.3 degrees. Using this value for V in the same equation gives the
power consumed by the antenna, also 37 watts.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:08 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 160-10m broadbanded dipole--too good to be true?
Date: 20 Oct 1995 18:48:26 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <468qtq$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: alpha.cc.oberlin.edu

I found in a ham catalog that just arrived an advertisement for
broadbanded dipoles claiming to have no more than 2:1 SWR on all
bands, at least on the 80-10 version (90 feet long) and the 160-10
version (also 90 feet long).  These are fed directly with 50 ohm
coax, and cost around 180 dollars.  What's the catch?  I want to
go from a nonresonant reactive G5RV to something resonant and to
something that will give me access to all bands my transceiver
can work (160-10).  I'm tempted.  Any comments?  --Bill KB8USZ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:09 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160-10m broadbanded dipole--too good to be true?
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 95 19:55:43 GMT
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <468qtq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:

>I found in a ham catalog that just arrived an advertisement for
>broadbanded dipoles claiming to have no more than 2:1 SWR on all
>bands, at least on the 80-10 version (90 feet long) and the 160-10
>version (also 90 feet long).  These are fed directly with 50 ohm
>coax, and cost around 180 dollars.  What's the catch?

I haven't seen that particular antenna, but there are only two ways I
know of to accomplish that.  Either the antenna has multiple conductors,
each tuned to a different band, or there's a big resistor somewhere.

Who makes it and what's it called?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:10 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!news.usafa.af.mil!usenet
From: 2LT Aaron Hartzler <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2-m Antenna Question
Date: 20 Oct 1995 14:20:36 GMT
Organization: DFAS/USAFA
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <468b7k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dfas62.usafa.af.mil
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Hey folks,

I am working on a project that will send data in packet format from a
high altitude (+100 K feet) balloon.  The system reports position, but it
will also have a command cutdown so that we can retrieve the payload when
we desire by sending a code to a receiver and decoder.  We have thought
about using handheld(s) as a transmitter and receiver, and both will
operate on 2-m to reduce complexity.  One handheld would operate very
nicely, but redundency forces us to use seperate systems for safety.

If we place the transmit antenna on the bottom of a foam box (the
structure) and a receive antenna on the top of the box, will they cause a
great deal of interference to each other?  Both would be vertically
polarized and pointing 180 degrees away from each other.  Will the
receive antenna (top) have any trouble receiving a signal through the
structure?  The cleanest solution would be one antenna for two
transceivers, but that notion has obvious EE limitations (i.e. fried
transceivers).  If we cannot come up with a solution we may be forced to
go to the 70 cm band with one of the systems.  Any help posted here or
e-mailed would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Aaron
KB0UDW (so new the ink is still wet)

"This content in no way reflects the opinions, standards, or policy of
the United States Air Force Academy or the United States government."



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:11 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: 2m quad sim results
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 21:04:34 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 24

A week or so ago Moritz asked if anyone had run an NEC2 simulation of a
2m quad that apparently was written up in QST several months ago and
received some discussion here.  As a new owner of EZNEC wanting to gain
some experience, I volunteered to do the simulation for him.  It's done
and I have results which I can email, if anyone wishes copies.  The
results are in four files, three of them about 66kbytes long and one
about 33 kbytes.  The files are for azimuth and elevation patterns for
both freespace and with the central axis of the antenna 10 meters above
perfect ground.  They include summaries of things like gain, beamwidth,
and feedpoint impedance, and have columns of H, V and total gain versus
angle in one degree increments, and each is for five frequencies, the
even MHz numbers from 144 to 148.  I might be willing to do a very
_limited_ amount of playing with dimensional changes, but it's going to
have to be pretty limited.

The output is strictly tabular; this seems to be a limitation of EZNEC
(unless you want to screen-capture a bitmap or somehow redirect your
printer output to a file).  Sorry I can't provide a postscript or HP-GL
representation of the graphics.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:12 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!tecsun1.tec.army.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 80m balcony antenna ant ideas ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <45f8i4$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 18:20:19 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:45f8i4$[e-mail]
Lines: 19

I do not know how close to the top of the building you are or how the
plumbing and electrical wiring is but here are two things to try.

1.  Get a loaded 80M dipole and frame the top and sides of your balcony
with it.  This will be a diploe with dropping ends.  The farther you can
stand it away from the building the better.  A flag pole at about 45░ at
each corner of the balcony and put a little fishing weight on the end of
the antenna might work.

2.  Since you are pretty far up you might try running a verticle wire
antenna along side of the building.  A bazooka type dipole or Windom
might be worth a try.

Good Luck
Bill Harwood
AB6DY





From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:13 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!lafn.org!lafn.org!ab910
From: [e-mail] (M. Davies)
Subject: Advice on good mobile antenna for IC-706 HF rig wanted.
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: lafn.org
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (M. Davies)
Organization: The Los Angeles Free-Net
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 01:00:35 GMT
Lines: 29




  Hello all. This the first mobile HF rig I've ever owned so I have zero
experience with good mobile antennas. The store I got the radio from said
all the Comet antennas were okay for HF. Are they? How about the mount?
Since I have a car that must take me to work daily and will NOT have any
holes drilled in it (Nissan 300ZXTT, Stage 3) the mount's a problem.

  How about transmit wattage and the cars brain-boxes? The 706 will do
100watts on HF. Can this much RF hurt the cars CPU?

  Any help at all would be great. Thanks.


                                               M. Davies









--
SALE. Yes! Be the first one on your block to take over the world.
 The Super-Conductive Magnetic Infindibulator.   Only $99,999.00
 ( As seen in the Farmers Almanac.)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:14 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!uunet.ca!news.uunet.ca!cuug.ab.ca!cuugnet!wederj
From: [e-mail] (Joel Weder)
Subject: Re: Antenna 400 ft from rig
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
X-Newsreader: TIN version 1.2 PL2
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 07:36:18 GMT
Lines: 34

[e-mail] wrote:
: I live at the bottom of a 80 ft. bluff and would like to put a tower up on
: the top (for obvious reasons!) :-) . There is about 400-450 feet of
: distance between my house and the top of the bluff (the slope is 20+
: percent).

: Does anybody have any experience running coax and rotor control cables for
: that distance for an HF tribander?  Am I nuts to even consider this?

: 73, Jim K9WIE

Considering that RG-213 has about 1.2 dB loss per 100 ft on 10 meters,
though less down on 20, I think there's a better idea. Get a rig with
a computer port, like Yaesu's CAT interface, and put it up in a shack
near the tower. Then run balanced pair TX and RX audio to the shack.

At that distance you'll want to also look into using some sort of system
to get the control signal up there. RS-232 won't work over that distance,
but you could get a pair of RS-232 to RS-422 converters. 422 uses two
balanced pairs with line drivers to work over considerable distances.

If this all seems too much, well then run the very best coax you can
find and live with it!

Well, though there may be linear amps out there with receive preamps
built in, like the VHF brick type. That would sure help...

Good luck, and 73........

--
  ************************************************************************
  *                                       Joel Weder                     *
  *                                                                      *
  *    How to reach me:   e-mail    -   [e-mail]                *


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!usenet
From: "Thomas D. Cox" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna 400 ft from rig
Date: 20 Oct 1995 23:39:58 GMT
Organization: IndyNet-Indys Internet Gateway
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <469c0f$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: indy1.indy.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jim,

If you can find a "short end" of surplus cable tv hardline, the aluminum-jacket
kind, you can use really long runs of it with very low loss at HF, and the big stuff
(>3/4") is real efficient way up into the VHF range. Usually, htese short ends are
free for the asking from the local cable contractor. You have to improvise
connectors, or you can buy them from ZD Engineering (419-424-8765) in Findlay, OH,
and some other outfits.

73,
Tom/KA5NEE/9
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!news.math.psu.edu!CTCnet!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!bud.shadow.net!news
From: mike fink <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best all around scanner antenna?
Date: 17 Oct 1995 23:39:18 GMT
Organization: Shadow Information Services, Inc.
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <461er6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-ftl2-17.shadow.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

I am wondering what the consensus is on who makes the best antenna
for scanning 25Mhz-1000Mhz,I am looking at adding a second antenna
and currently use a ScanKing 1500 Wideband from EEB.

Thanks fors any tips
Mike



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:16 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!tecsun1.tec.army.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Brand-X Autotuner, Brand-Y Radio?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <[e-mail]> <45oehl$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 18:23:33 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:45oehl$[e-mail]
Lines: 8

The SGC-230 could care less about what radio it is connected to.  Just
hook up the COAX and transmit.

Good Luck,

Bill Harwood -- AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax manufacturers
Date: 19 Oct 95 14:50:39 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <CA311948@MHS>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I noticed a thread about coax manufacturers going on.
Is there a "real" difference between RG213 with "Certified" stamped compared
to RG213 with a "Brand X" stamp?

73,
Roland WF4P/AAR2AA


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:18 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!slay
From: [e-mail] (Sandy Lynch)
Subject: Re: Comet Antenna (JA) Phone #
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <466m9n$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 16:35:44 GMT
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]

Mark Oppenheim ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Does anyone have the phone number (actually, fax would be perferred) for COMET antennas in
: Japan - I am looking for their list of distributors in the Pacific Rim and Europe.

: Thanks!

Comet's HQ phone/fax numbers from the USA would be:

Tel:  [phone]
Fax:  [phone]

73, Sandy
WA6BXH/7J1ABV
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:18 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news00.sunet.se!sunic!uunet!in2.uu.net!spstimes.sps.mot.com!newsdist.sps.mot.com!newsgate.sps.mot.com!phi-ho.sps.mot.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Phi-Ho Tran)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Compact ant for Dual HT
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 20 Oct 1995 23:17:44 GMT
Organization: Motorola
Lines: 8
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: phi-ho.sps.mot.com

I am looking for an ant. that is better than the std.
 rubber duck for dual bander such as Kenwood TH-79A
 or Yaesu 51R. Reqt:50 Ohms BNC connector&compact.

Is the ANLI AL-800 a good choice?
 Below is ANLI AL-800 specs
2 in 1  3.2dB(144-148Mhz),
5.6dB(430-450Mhz) VSWR:<1.5:1 Price ~$40.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:20 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ever-changing G5RV behavior
Date: 18 Oct 1995 13:44:24 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4630bq$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: alpha.cc.oberlin.edu

Why would a G5RV be unmatchable around 3.995 MHz one day, and the
next day tune up nicely on the same frequency?  I have the 102'
version up as an inverted V, apex at 35' above ground, with more
than 70' of RG8U going to the shack, plus an RF choke of 12 turns
6" in diameter at the junction between coax and ladderline (the
RF choke has done wonders, BTW--it now tunes up better on every
band although 15m still stinks--there's less EMI produced, and there's
no more RF biting at the station).
  Another question about the notorious G5RV:  why do the
instructions included with the Van Gordon G5RV say to use at least
70' of coax "in order for the antenna to perform properly"?
Some people on this list are saying there is much loss in the coax
when using a G5RV and shorter lengths would be better from a loss
standpoint.
  Mystified as ever when it comes to the black art of antennas,
 --Bill KB8USZ   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:21 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ever-changing G5RV behavior
Date: 18 Oct 1995 18:33:03 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 29
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <463h8v$[e-mail]>
References: <4630bq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <4630bq$[e-mail]>,
 <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  Another question about the notorious G5RV:  why do the
>instructions included with the Van Gordon G5RV say to use at least
>70' of coax "in order for the antenna to perform properly"?

The more coax you use, the lower the SWR at the transmitter end
since the more it looks like a dummy load. :-) The coax does do
some impedance transforming and there are good lengths and bad
lengths depending on the frequency.

>Some people on this list are saying there is much loss in the coax
>when using a G5RV and shorter lengths would be better from a loss
>standpoint.

From a loss standpoint, *NO* coax is better. Open-wire or ladder-line
is about as low loss as you can get.

Someone needs to measure the impedance of a G5RV at the coax/ladder-line
junction. The "matching section" only matches things on 20m. It is a
transmission line transformer on all the other bands resulting in
mismatches on some of the other bands.

My signal reports jumped about half an 'S' unit when I eliminated coax
from my G5RV. I expect them to jump again when I trade in my balun for
a homebrew balanced-output transmatch.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:22 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ever-changing G5RV behavior
Date: 18 Oct 1995 17:43:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <463seu$[e-mail]>
References: <4630bq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Bill,

In article <4630bq$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:

>Why would a G5RV be unmatchable around 3.995 MHz one day, and the
>next day tune up nicely on the same frequency?  I have the 102'
>version up as an inverted V, apex at 35' above ground, with more
>than 70' of RG8U going to the shack, plus an RF choke of 12 turns
>6" in diameter at the junction between coax and ladderline (the
>RF choke has done wonders, BTW--it now tunes up better on every
>band although 15m still stinks--there's less EMI produced, and there's
>no more RF biting at the station).

Who knows! My guesses are the correct tuner settings aren't being repeated
each day, or something around the antenna is changing. After all, your
antenna is pretty close to the ground and has a lot of movable or
changable stuff all around it. When I lived in the city (and had a dipole
just above the roof), I saw a pretty big SWR change when the porch light
was turned off and on! I could light the turned-off bulb on twenty meters!


>  Another question about the notorious G5RV:  why do the
>instructions included with the Van Gordon G5RV say to use at least
>70' of coax "in order for the antenna to perform properly"?

Because the extra losses moderate the impedance of the feedline on the
higher bands. It sure isn't the best idea in terms of efficiency, but it
makes it "load up".

>Some people on this list are saying there is much loss in the coax
>when using a G5RV and shorter lengths would be better from a loss
>standpoint.

That's true, especially on ten and 15.

73 Tom



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:23 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite beads to
Date: 18 Oct 1995 17:43:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 33
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <463ses$[e-mail]>
References: <463i91$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Cecil,

In article <463i91$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:

> earlier reported that putting a 6pf cap in one side of the ladder-line
>on 10m resulted in a 2 'S' unit gain reported by N5AQM 15 miles away.
>What I think happened is the cap completely unbalanced the ladder-line
>currents so my 88 ft. dipole turned into a vertical with a top hat. :-)

That's probably what happened. Horizontal pol signals have a tough time on
ground wave, hi.

>
>Could switching to a Marconi style feed improve signal reports under
>certain conditions? I think I'll design that feature into my new
>homebrew transmatch.

I used to do this on several bands, but (for efficiency and RFI sake) I
never brought the feedline in the house. OTOH you probably don't run QRO
either, so RFI would be less if you did!

I had a 40 meter dipole fed with ribbon line. On 40 meters and above it
was loaded like a dipole, on 80 down like a "T" against radials. Sometimes
I wouldn't even bother (or remember) to switch the feedpoint relay! I've
also used a choke balun (air wound) to de-couple the flat top dipole from
a vertical feedline so the top loading doesn't screw up the current
distribution when loading the feeder up as a vertical. The choke can even
be selected to top load the feedline for 160 if the flat-top is too small!

It's like a bonus antenna.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:24 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news00.sunet.se!sunic!uunet!in1.uu.net!newshub1.wanet.net!ucsnews!newshub.sdsu.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Danny Ozbirn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #496
Date: 17 Oct 95 15:12:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 98
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

-- [ From: Danny Ozbirn * EMC.Ver #2.3 ] --


-------- REPLY, Original message follows --------

Date: Tuesday, 17-Oct-95 08:26 AM

From: Ham Ant                  \ Internet:    ([e-mail])
From: Ham Ant                  \ Internet:    ([e-mail])
To:   Danny Ozbirn             \ MCI Mail:    (DOZBIRN / MCI ID: 201-7344)

Subject: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #496


Ham-Ant Digest              Tue, 17 Oct 95       Volume 95 : Issue  496



Suppose we have a resonant, lossless antenna with feedpoint impedance 37 + j0
ohms. Connect a 37 volt RMS source to it.

        Q1. What's the magnitude of the current flowing into the feedpoint?

          A1. 1 amp RMS.

        Q2. How much of the current is "reactive current"?

          A2. I'll leave this to you. I maintain there's no such thing.

        Q3. How much power is being delivered by the source?

          A3. 37 watts.

        Q4. What's the power radiated by the antenna?

          A4. 37 watts.

Now, put an inductor with reactance of 370 ohms in series with the antenna.
Increase the source voltage to 371.8 volts RMS. Now the current is 0.0995 -
j0.995 amps = 1 /_ -84.3 degrees.

        Q5. What's the magnitude of the current flowing into the feedpoint?

          A5. 1 amp RMS.

        Q6. How much of the current is "reactive current"?

          A6. Your turn again.

        Q7. How much power is being delivered by the source?

          A7. 37 watts.

        Q8. What's the power radiated by the antenna?

          A8. 37 watts.

(If you got the wrong answer of 0.366 watts for A7 or A8, calculate the power
using P = Re(VI*), where V is the voltage across the antenna terminals (371.8 +
j0) and I* is 0.0995 + j0.995.)

If the -j0.995 amps isn't what's being called "reactive current", then I'd
appreciate it if someone would present a simple circuit which shows what it is
supposed to be.

One more exercise. Let's choose a different time for "time zero". Hopefully,
our choice of when to call zero won't change steady-state power dissipation.
I'll choose "time zero" so that the source voltage is now 371.8 /_ 90 degrees.
The current is now 0.995 + j 0.0995, or 1 /_ 5.7 degrees. Have I magically
turned "reactive amps" into "real amps"? Source power, antenna current, and
radiated power haven't changed (which they'd better not!)

The fact is, the current just doesn't care what you call zero time or phase.
Good thing, too.

What I've presented here is very simple circuit analysis. I hope that people
with other points of view can also express them in simple terms and not have to
invoke esoteric principles. Or perhaps "reactive current" is a much more
complicated concept than I thought.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL

----------- REPLY, End of original message --------

The above argument maybe good and well, but the last time I looked in a basic
electronics book there
was a thing called a power factor in AC circuitry and AC circuits which I think
includes RF antennas.
Power factor equals cosign of  theta, so even if you are putting 37 watts into
the second hypothetical  situation you gave you would not be radiating 37 watts
because, according to electrical theory, ractive power is not actual power.  If
your theory was right a capacitor and inductor in series would make an antenna
good as a half-wave dipole, bu I don't think it works that way in the real
world.


                                        73 Dan WB5HKK


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:25 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!buffnet2.buffnet.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (dave)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help Using Spectrum Analyzer
Date: 19 Oct 1995 05:29:44 GMT
Organization: BuffNET
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <464no8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dppp8.buffnet.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.2

Owner said it worked fine but needed a connector repair. The price was
right so off I went with 60 lbs of spectrum analyzer. Well after repairing
a connector and the 12 volt rail it appears to work fine. Lots of stuff happening
the FM BCB with a small antenna at the input.

Here is the problem.. No operation manuals. It has knobs I am sure how to
use. It has a tuning and  phase control. Switches for LO enable, Phase Lock
and Signal Identifier. How do you operate this thing (ie: center frequency) ?

It is a late sixties early seventies vintage SINGER SPA-3000 (99% solid state).
This thing will tune from 100MHz to 40 Ghz. I really would like to be able to use
it properly. Thought some of the more experienced ones could steer me in the
right direction.

Thanks ...

Daveb


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:26 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.islandnet.com!salmon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How do I tune the SWR on a dual band antenna?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 12:28:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
References: <45m9eb$[e-mail]>
Lines: 10


BB>I am just getting into HAM and I've just installed a mobile
BB>2m/70cm dual band LARSEN antenna on my car. When I

I have 2 of those antennas, one on my truck and the other on my 4
wheeler.  I was told when I bought them that they are pre-tuned and not
to worry about it.  I've been using them for a couple years now and no
problems yet.
---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ I know a good tag line when I steal one


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:27 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us!SABINW
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: I^2*R
Date: 18 Oct 1995 19:01:16 GMT
Organization: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Cedar Rapids, IA,  52401
Lines: 2
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <463its$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us

You are right Jack.  I forgot to include heat and near-field losses.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:27 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!lynx.unm.edu!bubba.NMSU.Edu!usenet
From: Tim Pettibone <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Indoor antenna for HF
Date: 20 Oct 1995 15:39:28 GMT
Organization: NMSU
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <468frg$[e-mail]>
References: <jimwrigh-1910951159070001@47.34.5.74>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc-tpettibone.nmsu.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jim:

I used to have a 20m dipole strung on the top floor (up about 20') in a
stucco house (chicken wire in the walls) with a tile roof.  Worked WAS
and WAC with 5 watts cw.  If that's all you can do, do it.  If you use
really small wire and are careful, even the XYL won't object too much.
My antenna is now a center fed random dipole fed w/ 300 ohm tv twinlead.
 The antenna is up about 20 feet and  is 70' or so long.  Used about # 30
wire.  Can't see it if you try.  It's outside now.

Tim AB5OU




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com!ftp.unisql.com!unisql.unisql.com!news
From: Jim Strohm <jstrohm@blazer>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Indoor antenna for HF
Date: 20 Oct 1995 22:06:39 GMT
Organization: UniSQL, Inc.
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <4696hf$[e-mail]>
References: <jimwrigh-1910951159070001@47.34.5.74>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blazer.unisql.com
X-Newsreader: NCSA Mosaic

Jim Wright writes:

>      Does anyone have any suggestions or experience with indoor
>      antennas for HF use.  And, would 80M or 40M be out of the
>      question?

For indoor antennas to work well, you need to be in a structure that's
relatively transparent to RF.  A tin shack ain't gonna work.  I've heard
of varying results in stone and brick houses; if you have wood (or similar)
siding you should be able to do something.  Similarly, roof composition makes
a difference but asphalt composition shingles seem to let RF leak out.

For obvious safety reasons, you want to keep the antenna as far as is reasonably
possible from where people are, and use lower power levels.  Many hams
have had good results with "Slinky" dipoles on all bands.  If you have the room
for a full-size dipole in the attic, by all means try it.  You might also
try winding a dipole on mailing tubes -- this gives the ability to rotate the
antenna if you make it short enough...remember it's not a tri-bander at 60 feet.
Probably this is the most sanitary and easiest indoor antenna.

You might consider a mobile antenna if you have a suitable counterpoise.
One ham I met had excellent results with the DK3 "screwdriver" antennas --
he put a pair base-to-base and fed it as a dipole, for all-band coverage.
Not cheap though.  I've tried the Isotron antennas but they're very frequency-
selective and are fussy about setup.  Plus, they're not XYL-approved.

Finally, you can try loading up the old rain gutter.  But I recall one
old boy who set his house on fire this way.

GUD LUK ES CUL  (no, that doesn't mean I'm an AOL user!!)

Jim N6OTQ




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:29 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newsflash.concordia.ca!sunqbc.risq.net!news.riq.qc.ca!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: J-Pole/Ground
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 95 15:48:09 PDT
Organization: Reseau Internet Quebec
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: riq1003.riq.qc.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


I just finished building my 2m J-Pole but I want to know if I need to ground
it.

And If I need to ground it, how should I do it?

The antenna is 8.5 feet High and is 10 feet lower than the highest point of
the roof.

Thanks.

Maxime Caron
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: K6STI low noise lop question
Date: 18 Oct 1995 10:59:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 33
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4634o0$[e-mail]>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951015193039.26845A-100000@ume>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Rick,

In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.951015193039.26845A-100000@ume>, Rick Zabrodski
<[e-mail]> writes:

>My question:  Why the obsession with coaxial feed lines?
>
>Seems to me this is a balanced antenna and balanced feeders hooked up to
>one of my home brew link coupled tuners or my z match tuner should remove

>all this 52 ohm SWR neurosis that so many hams seem to have.

Not in this application. I would expect Brian's idea was to make the
transition to an unbalanced line as quickly and accurately as possible. I
would go a few steps further, and add a couple good choke baluns along the
coaxial line to prevent the feedline from coupling noise back to the
antenna via the shield. I do this with my phased receiveing array of loops
on 160, and even with my Beverages.

>If somebody can ask K6STI or W6KUT about this or has an opinion as to why

>I am wrong....please let me know.  Regardless, I will press on and build
>it, putting the prototype version a few feet above the roof, hopefully
>before the snow comes and stays.  450 ohm line sans coax that is!
>BTW....seems to me that transmitting on the antenna with balanced lines
>should also work  on multiple bands although it obviously will likely not

>radiate well in the low angle department if low to the gound.

Or radiate well at any angle on the low bands because of the very low rad
resistance!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:31 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (HeadShrnkr)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: KLM 2m-22c antenna problem?
Date: 19 Oct 1995 10:36:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <465nqa$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (HeadShrnkr)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I used the "?" mark in my message header since I am not at all certain is
this a coax or antenna problem. A little background first. I have a KLM
2m-22C mounted on a KLM fiberglass crossbeam with a KLM 435-40cx on the
other end. I use the Yaesu GB5400 rotator system, SSB premaps, and 9913
feedline to the amps, and RG213 from the amps to the antennas. A typical
Oscar station.

My problem, high SWR on 2m. SWR is ok on 70cm. 2m SWR ranges from 4:1 to
2.2:1. The SWR rises as the freq is lowered. At 144 Mhz the SWR is about
4:1, at 147 Mhz it is about 2.2:1. The reading is steady, does not bounce
or change rapidly. If I use the polarity swithing deivce that KLM has and
the SWR still is high, it does not seem to make any difference. Reflected
power is also high as one would suspect with a high SWR.

My 70cm setup is fine, so I assume that my basic layout is ok as well. My
question is how can I determine what is at fault, the antenna or the coax?
Is there a way to measure the coax with a DVM? I tend to believe that the
feedline is ok as the preamps are switched on and off by a voltage sent up
the coax, and the preamp switching works fine. I am concerned about the
cable running from the antenna to the preamp box. Would a defective coax
connector cause this, or is it a possible problem with the antenna? I have
a considerable amount of climbing to get the antenna so I wanted to try to
acess the situation from the ground as throughly as possible. Thanks for
your assistance. email to [e-mail] is appericated.

73,
Bruce KB2VKJ

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------


"We, the people are the rightful masters of both the congress and the
courts - not to overthrow the constitition, but to overthrow men who
pervert the constitution" - A. Lincoln

Bruce J. Howes
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (DGoodman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MFJ-1798 80-2m?
Date: 18 Oct 1995 18:02:23 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <463thf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DGoodman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Has MFJ ever shipped this everything-but-160-on-a-pole antenna?  If so,
has anyone had the courage to purchase, install, and operate one?

AE9F/6


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (DCorwin639)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Newbie Needs Yagi Help
Date: 20 Oct 1995 06:54:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 36
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <467v5g$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DCorwin639)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Newbie Needs Yagi Help

I recently attempted the construction of a 3 element Yagi antenna in the 6
meter band.  I constructed the antenna with the intent of receiving only.
The result of my endeavor is only slightly better than the Radio Shack all
band ground plane antenna.  The following questions arise:

1. Given that the elements are spaced properly, how important is it that
the elements are parallel?

2. The ARRL Antenna Book indicates that an element with an aluminum
mounting plate should be longer then an element without a mounting plate,
however the Yagis Analysis program returns an element that is shorter with
a 4" x 4" aluminum mounting plate.  What am I missing here.

3. The antenna book doesn't discuss the lengths of the driven element
mounted on a non conducting plate vs. the parasitic elements mounted on
aluminum plates.  I assume the driven element is calculated using the
Yagis Analysis program as if it had a 0" x 0" plate while the parasitic
elements are calculated with 4" x 4" plates and the results are combined.

4. If 75 ohm coax is used for the balum rather then 50 ohm will this
dramatically degrade performance?  If 75 ohm cable is used for the feed
line will this degrade performance?

5. What does the hairpin match do?

6. How does one successfully solder a copper strap to the back of the
SO-239 feed?

Any comments would be appreciated.

Thank you in advance.

David Corwin
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!usenet
From: "Thomas D. Cox" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Receiving Loop ?
Date: 20 Oct 1995 23:34:52 GMT
Organization: IndyNet-Indys Internet Gateway
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <469bms$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: indy1.indy.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Roger,

I built an electrostatically-shielded loop from the Antenna Hbk. I just used a 5-ft
diameter piece of surplus aluminum hardline. I found that I could tune it from the
bottom end of the AM broadcast band up above 4 MHz by adding and subtracting caps,
starting with a scounged SW rcvr variable cap. I think if you keep the loop small
enough so it doesn't violate the upper limit of size mentioned in the Book,
(some small fraction of a wavelength) you can't really go wrong. It's a great way to
improve the signal to noise ratio, if you can tolerate the inefficiency.

73,
Tom/KA5NEE
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:35 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!bcm.tmc.edu!news.tamu.edu!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rombic antenna questions
Date: 18 Oct 1995 06:50:13 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <462835$[e-mail]>
References: <a117cb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.194.44.211
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:65024 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16605

In <a117cb$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert M. Bratcher Jr.) writes:
>I recently moved to the country on 90 acres of land about 100 miles
>northwest of Houston Texas. I have built longwire antennas up to 3
>acres in length and once a couple of V beams on 5 acres. Now that I
>have more land available I want to build several rombic antennas. My
>reciever is an R-390a. How long can each antenna be before the radio
>overloads on strong stations? I do listen to some of those but also
>the weaker stations. Are there any books other than the ARRL handbook
>that cover this antenns in detail? By the way, I will be feeding them
>with homemade ladder line also known as open wire feed at about 4 inch
>spacing. I would also like to hear from anyone that has used this type
>of antenna.
>
>
Ask Don Ehland over in Jasper at Jasper Creosote about rhombics in South
Texas, or any thunderstorm prone area as well!  Plot a few on your handy
dandy MN program or whatever.  Pay CLOSE attention to the myriad of wild
stray lobes that go UPWARD from the thing in the vertical direction.

Then, since you and I are right in the heart of TRW country, I'm in Kurten,
Tx, not far from you, consider where you will be in all these absolutely
delightful thunderstorm passages!  As Don will confirm, everytime one of the
things gets within ten or twenty miles of you, the static hash wipes you
out on the lower bands with the rhombics.  They make beautiful transmitting
platforms and receiving deals if the site is quiet, but not necessarily any real
good receptor for very noisy locations.

They are formidable single path arrays for dedicated circuits, witness the ZS6
63 acre site of them in Irene, South Africa.  Dave will confirm that he spends
half his time chasing down power line and hash leaks all over creation to
keep them effective.  They really don't begin to shine well unless they are
more than 2 wave lengths on a leg.  Plus, they still have to be up at the one
wavelength height or so to bring the angles down.  That means 120-180 feet
up on 40 and 80 meters.  Dave's best signals into here come from the array
that is up at 150 feet that is 660 feet on a leg.

The best engineering treatment on them that I have is in the old JASIK
antenna bible.  I have the book, think I paid about $40 for it back in 1965
or so.  They are treated well enough for amateur design also in the W6SAI
Radio Handbook.

We have a local EE prof here that just put a 200 footer up at College Station.
Break me after bulletin at 3516Khz 0245GMT Sunday night and get info.

Mike @ W5WQN



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!winternet.com!news.minn.net!skypoint.com!umn.edu!newsstand.tc.umn.edu!dialup-3-192.gw.umn.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Winston Jackson Ray)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RU 188
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 08:16:12 -0600
Organization: University of Minnesota
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-3-192.gw.umn.edu

I would like to know more about the use of RU 188 coax. I would like to
insert a small length of it to connect to my HT when using a remote
antenna to minimise stress on the connector an the HT. Is it possible to
put connectors on RU 188 "at home"?

I have the Yaesu FT-10 and it has an SMA antenna connector. How does one
describe each part of this connector, when end is "male" and which is
"female"? (the shield on the radio is female and the conductor male).

Thanks,

Jack


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:38 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!sparky!nlcnews.nlc.state.ne.us!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary McDuffie, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Sierra
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 22:34:57 GMT
Organization: NLC Nebraska
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <463v6l$[e-mail]>
References: <45tb4c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.206.239.249
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99b.112

On 16 Oct 1995 10:11:24 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>I'll like to get documentation about Sierra Antenna.

Okay, go ahead!

>Thank you

You're welcome.  Anytime!

Cheers :)

Gary



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:38 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 18 Oct 1995 20:58:52 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <463pqc$[e-mail]>
References: <45tace$[e-mail]> <46022p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:

> [...] Explain why manufacturers get away with woven braid (talk about
> rough) or aluminum conductors on the outside of some very low loss RF
> cables! [...]

Because the current's supposed to be on the inside of the cable shield,
flowing in the nice smooth foil :)?  I always thought the braid was just
there to be something you could solder to, not to carry current.

I do agree that worrying about whether a 239 used as the hub of a VHF
groundplane is polished or not is an angels-on-pinheads attitude and a
complete waste of time.

regards,
Ross
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:39 1995
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Rogich)
Subject: RE: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: 18 Oct 95 00:32:33 -0700
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: TheMicrosoftNetwork(msn.com)
Lines: 2

October QST are u referring to ?
Thanks


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:40 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!btnet!zetnet.co.uk!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 03:08:51 GMT
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <460oqf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal) wrote:

>On 20m and up, a vertical delta at the same height beats the dipole
>by 1-3S.

I'll bet that if you feed the line through a balanced tuner instead of
a balun, much of that difference will disappear.  Your effectiveness on
the lower bands may improve as well.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!bt!btnet!zetnet.co.uk!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 03:15:07 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Jerry Rogich) wrote:

> 1. Is there a shortened Carolina Windom available with loading coils ?
> 2. Use an all band dipole with open feedline (but what lenght feedline
> do I need before I can get it to where I have to run it along the ground
> ?

I wouldn't recommend running ladder line along the ground, so that leaves
No. 1.  My idea would be to build a dipole with loading coils on the ends,
resonant on 80M.  Then, add traps to cover the other bands and feed it with
a good current balun at the feedpoint.

It's a little work, but this is probably your best choice for multiband
operation, given the physical restrictions of the site.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: 18 Oct 1995 14:53:05 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <4634ch$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <460oqf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: misz.animal.uiuc.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>   [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal) wrote:
>
>>On 20m and up, a vertical delta at the same height beats the dipole
>>by 1-3S.
>
>I'll bet that if you feed the line through a balanced tuner instead of
>a balun, much of that difference will disappear.  Your effectiveness on
>the lower bands may improve as well.
>
>73,
>
>Jack  WB3U

I doubt that. The loss in balun for full-size and oversized
antennas is not likely to be large. A vertical loop or delta has lower
radiation angle, and perhaps smaller radiation losses. For instance,
a small vertical loop can work DX at 5 ft.  Horizontal loop at 5 ft is
5S down, as most likely it just heats the soil.


Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Illinois      1207 W. Gregory Dr., Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. [phone]         Fax: [phone]



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 15:24:45 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <460oqf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4634ch$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal) wrote:

>The loss in balun for full-size and oversized antennas is not likely to
>be large.

The loss can and will be large when feeding loads that differ
significantly from the 200-450 ohm environment that most 4:1 baluns
are designed for.  There's little doubt that a 40M dipole won't
present a suitable impedance on all the bands from 160 to 10M.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.isl.net!sparc.isl.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Dale E. Heltzer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Somer 80..2 mtr DiskCone ant??
Date: 18 Oct 1995 14:44:26 -0500
Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sparc.isl.net

Greetings!

The August QST had an entry in the "New Products" about a diskcone
antenna said to be good from 80 to 2 meters.

Has anyone had any experience with it?
Kudos, criticisms, warnings, ... wise-acre remarks?

Thanks.

Dale E. Heltzer, KD0KV

---
A day without coffee is like ...
Something ... without ...
Something else.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (DGoodman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Somer 80..2 mtr DiskCone ant??
Date: 18 Oct 1995 17:59:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <463tcv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DGoodman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>The August QST had an entry in the "New Products" about a diskcone
>antenna said to be good from 80 to 2 meters.

It's not in production yet, but soon.  Literature will be ready next week,
according to info I got from a call to Sommer.

AE9F/6


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.ACO.net!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-ulm.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Somer 80..2 mtr DiskCone ant??
Date: 19 Oct 1995 08:00:32 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4650j0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>The August QST had an entry in the "New Products" about a diskcone
>antenna said to be good from 80 to 2 meters.

A diskcone for 80? This will be surely an impressive antenna.
I should like to know, how the "disk" section with a diameter of
60 ft can be suspended at a height of at least 100 ft?
(remember, the "cone" radiates and has to be mounted clear of the ground)



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!dartvax.dartmouth.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian H. Meyette)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for EHS guy wire?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 13:27:01 GMT
Organization: Tally Systems Corp
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <462v7v$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: v2-p-102.valley.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Bill Turner) sez:

>Can anyone recommend a source for 3/16 galvanized EHS guy wire?  Need about
>1000 feet.
>Thanks,
>73, Bill W7LZP
>[e-mail]

I don't know where you're located, but check with Rohn or their nearest dealer
309 697-4400
They have it in 500' and 1000' rolls

Brian


* Brian Meyette ([e-mail])  Cornish, New Hampshire, USA



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:47 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newshub1.wanet.net!ucsnews!newshub.sdsu.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Greg Wasik)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: subscribe
Date: 18 Oct 95 20:21:48 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


--Boundary (ID U4nPBwirf7gRCHgw6KmzrQ)
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN

subscribe [e-mail]



--Boundary (ID U4nPBwirf7gRCHgw6KmzrQ)--


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!iafrica.com!ticsa.com!cstatd.cstat.co.za!usenet
From: [e-mail] (James Bestbier)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toriod for impedance matching
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 09:05:33 GMT
Organization: Internet Africa
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <462fg2$[e-mail]>
References: <44pppm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slipper124131.iafrica.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen) wrote:

>I have used some time to figure out how to impedance match my
>beverage, after having read an article in the 1988 edition of
>Proceedings.

>Now, the problem is that in Sweden I cannot get hold of the Amidon
>FT50-43 core mentionen in the article. As I can get hold of other
>ferritt toroidal cores (primarily Philips) I thought it was a simple
>matter of using some formulas.
>I suppose it still is, but after having tried and found that all this
>mathematic isn't my stuff - at least I really don't know what to do
>with all those different Philips data to get the correct number of
>turns to put on such a toroid so that my 3-400 ohms beverage match a
>50 ohms coax. (And I really need a coax, as the end of my beverage
>goes right below a local powerline, which some occasional nasty
>sparks...)

>So: why not ask the persons who knows?
>And to give you the details:
>I can get hold of a Philips toroid suitable, so it says, for "RFI
>filtering up to 30 MHz". Should work fine, I guess. The Philips code
>for this is 4C65, which comes in these flavors:
>A
> L  => 20/30/55/87/170

>I can also get a Philips 4A11, for "RFI filtering" between 3-30 MHz,
>maybe not that suited for medium wave, but then the A-L is closer to
>that of the Amidon FT43-50, so who am I to say. The details for the
>4A11:
>A
> L  =>  130/290/360/450/940

>Now: what are the correct number of turns to wind on one of those
>Philips toroids in order to match a beverage to a coax?

>=====

>Or, if some of you have better access to Amidon data, I can get hold
>on a Amidon T-50-2 toroid, with the different "nH/n2" values as
>follows:
>2.7 / 4.0 / 4.9 / 5.5 / 11 / 12
>(which doesn't mean a thing to me...)

>Now: what are the correct number of turns to wind on such a Amidon
>T-50-2 toroid to match a beverage to a coax?

>======

>Another way to go would be to find a supplier of the Amidon FT50-43
>core, one that wouldn't charge you for a Rolls to ship a tiny toroid
>core to Sweden. If there is such a supplier?

>Any assistance is highly appreciated, as I really need to get my
>beverage fixed.







From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 20 Oct 1995 21:12:09 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4693b9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

Not really knowing what I was doing, I have always used type '2' red toroids
for HF stuff simply because the Amidon brochure says it has a frequency range
of 3-30MHz. I have been using T80-2 toroids for current pickups on my 300 ohm
ladder-line but the output is pretty low (1v p-p) with 60t of #28. So I wound
a new pickup on an FT82-61 which has a u=125 vs the red#2 u=10. But I got
approximately the same output from the 61 core as from the #2 core. The two
cores are about the same size with the same number of turns. What gives?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Christopher Scibelli)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: U.S. Tower
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 18:14:57 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4664mo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-spr-ma1-26.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Oct 19 11:16:57 AM PDT 1995
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Does anyone have any comments on U.S. Tower's products?  I'm
considering the MA-550 tubular tower with the rotating base and
raising fixture.

Chris
NU1O

----------------------
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: VSWR's In An Electrical Short Line?
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 95 03:45:09 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <466c7h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <466c7h$[e-mail]>, Max wrote:
>
>Can anyone tell me how to figure the VSWR's in an electrically short
>line?
>
>Let's say for example, that the transmission line is so short that
>the voltage variation along the line is only 1% of the peak voltage,
>but the mismatch, at the load, is severe; maybe 10:1.
>
>Does this mean that the reflected wave would be 90% of 1%?  Or, in
>other words, 0.9%?

If I understood your question correctly, the answer is that SWR remains
essentially the same (10:1) throughout the line.  Impedance seen at the
feedpoint will change with line length.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 20 21:19:51 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!dartvax.dartmouth.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian H. Meyette)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB:  Rohn 25 tower sections in New England
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 13:23:12 GMT
Organization: Tally Systems Corp
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <462v0m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: v2-p-102.valley.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I'm looking for used inexpensive Rohn 25 sections in NH/VT or New England, in
good condition.    I need 6-7.
Brian

[phone] ext 210

* Brian Meyette ([e-mail])  Cornish, New Hampshire, USA




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: !!! Over 400 WWW Ham Sites !!!
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 95 21:09:14 PDT
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <NEWTNews.814767294.12034.amsoft@486dx4_120>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwbyppp84.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.swap:49862 rec.radio.shortwave:65315 rec.radio.scanner:40009 rec.radio.amateur.space:5556 rec.radio.amateur.policy:31613 rec.radio.amateur.misc:93601 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:11306 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:20894 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:12400 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16746


Try the URL http://hamster.business.uwo.ca/~amsoft  And link to over
400 WWW sites from the Home Page. All Amateur Radio / Communications
related URL's !  This is the Mother of all Ham Radio Link Pages.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!dsi.unimi.it!sirio.cineca.it!gopher
From: Andy IK4WMG <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (no subject)
Date: 22 Oct 1995 11:35:25 GMT
Organization: -
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <46da9t$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sercom.nettuno.it
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Hi OMs I have a 22mt high fullsize vertical for 80 mt, I want to charge
it at bottom to use it in 160 mt. Anyone can suggest me the dimension of
coil? We suppose a support of PVC tube 80mm diameter.
Thank you in advance
IK4WMG - Andy ShortWave/\LongLife




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:38 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!prodigy.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Stephen Bosbach)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/2 wave vertical for 20 mtrs, how to feed?
Date: 22 Oct 1995 22:32:49 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY
Lines: 8
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46egqh$[e-mail]>
References: <nh4zhcah$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: inugap4.news.prodigy.com
X-Newsreader: Version 1.2

Hi,  I used just such an antenna years ago with very good results.  I fed
the antenna sections exactly as you describe and it worked quite well,
low SWR and broad banded!  The coax going up through the middle seems to
act as a RF choke and prevents stray currents from forming on the lower
section.  Worked for me.

Steve KG5BR



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: 1/2 wave vertical for 20 mtrs, how to feed?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <NH4ZhCAh$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:20:03 GMT
Lines: 11

        I tried the same trick on a 2 meter version with poor resuts.
This is the ultimate, unbalanced arrangement and causes severe feedline
radiation. I think the cure is to choke the RF from the outer braid of
the coax at the point where it exits the lower half of your vertical.
Perhaps a choke could be formed by winding the coax up in a loop.
You know how the ant. books always warn you to bring the coax off a
dipole at a right angle? Well you're doing just the opposite here! A few
years ago there was an article in QST desribing "End Fed Dipoles" and
they used a method similar to this.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:39 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!news
From: Coen Waasdorp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 1/2 wave vertical for 20 mtrs, how to feed?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ldn99-24.leiden.nl.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News at news)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NLnet
References: <nh4zhcah$[e-mail]> <46egqh$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 06:13:38 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b1 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Lines: 18

Stephen Bosbach wrote:
>
> Hi,  I used just such an antenna years ago with very good results.  I fed
> the antenna sections exactly as you describe and it worked quite well,
> low SWR and broad banded!  The coax going up through the middle seems to
> act as a RF choke and prevents stray currents from forming on the lower
> section.  Worked for me.
>
> Steve KG5BR

Steve,

Thanks for your input.

73

Coen Waasdorp
PA0COE


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:40 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!rkarlqu
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/2 wave vertical for 20 mtrs, how to feed?
Date: 24 Oct 1995 00:04:24 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <46hai8$[e-mail]>
References: <NH4ZhCAh$[e-mail]> <46gks1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpscrj.scd.hp.com

In article <46gks1$[e-mail]>,
Richard Karlquist <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <NH4ZhCAh$[e-mail]>,
>Coen Waasdorp  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>After having read some info on the R5 and R7 I got the idea to try to
>>build a half wave vertical for 20 meters.
>>
>>- two aluminium sections, each basically 1/4 wave length, on top of each
>>other, separated by insulation material, so creating a vertical dipole.
>>
>>Coen Waasdorp
>>PA0COE
>
>I once had a 1/2 wave 20 meter vertical that consisted of a single
>conductor (alum tubing) 10 meters long (33 feet) attached to my
>chimney.  I fed it from the bottom with a matching circuit
>consisting of a 50 pF., 3000V air variable and a 5 uH coil.
>Very simple to tune up.  Just tune capacitor for min.  VSWR,
>and change coil tap one turn at a time until you get 1:1.
>Tune for 14.175 MHz and it's good enough for the whole band.
>And I didn't need any radials.
>
>Rick Karlquist
>[e-mail]
>

Oops, Tom Bruhns pointed out to me by email that I had left it
as an exercise to the reader to figure out how to connect the
L and C to the coax and antenna.

Coen Wassdorp sent in the correct answer:


> From [e-mail] Mon Oct 23 15:55 PDT 1995
>
> Am I correct you used the following set up:
>
>                         ||
>                         ||  33 feet alum tubing
>                         ||
>                         ||
>                        /  \
>                  50pF  C   L 5uH coil
>                        \  /
>                         ||
> outside of 50 ohm coax <||> inside of 50 Ohm coax
>
> Coen Waasdorp
> PA0COE

CORRECT!

If you want, you can attach a radial or counterpoise to the
coax shield at the matching network, or even at the transmitter
end; however, I didn't need to do that with my installation.
Since the input impedance of the whip is well over 1000 ohms,
it doesn't take much capacitance in the counterpoise to
keep RF off the coax shield.  In my case, the coax shield
WAS the counterpoise for all practical purposes.

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!mssm.edu!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!Belgium.EU.net!ping.be!dialup01.hasselt.eunet.be!jan.anker
From: [e-mail] (Jan Anker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/2 wave vertical for 20 mtrs, how to feed?
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 23:00:52
Organization: Anchor Datacomm
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <NH4ZhCAh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup01.hasselt.eunet.be
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Coen,
Kijk in je mailbox, post voor je!
pa0lbn, Jan Anker, on9cja


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!nntp0.brunel.ac.uk!strath-cs!info!sirius!csd3cr
From: Max Lock <csd3cr@sirius>
Subject: 1/8th wave vertical for 2m?...
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.951027132840.19517B-100000@sirius>
Sender: [e-mail] (news admin)
Organization: University of Exeter, UK
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 13:31:35 GMT
Lines: 17


 hi all.

 just a quick question, how effective would it be to build a 1/8th wave
vertical whip for 2m and possibilly 70cms. I'm thinking along the lines
of a piece of coathanger in a PL259 connector.

 I don't really want to mess around with any loading coils, so any
opinions would be gratefully accepted.

 73's de Max..

--
 Internet: [e-mail]  /__/__/ University Of Hertfordshire /---/\
 Packet: G7UOZ@GB7MSW (AX.25)   /  /| /     Amateur Radio Society   /___/__\
 Ham Radio: G7UOZ 44.131.166.25     |_______________________________|___|__|



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:43 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: 10 METER MOBIL ANTENNA ?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <45tqc5$hm5$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 13:06:59 GMT
Lines: 13

In article <45tqc5$hm5$[e-mail]>,
   Thomas Brady <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Does anyone have a recommendation for a highend commercially
>available mobil 10 meter antenna ?
-------------------------------------------------
Get a Radio Shack stainless steel CB whip and trim it down for 10 meters.  Use
an SWR meter and remove about 1/4 inch at a time.  (You can always cut it
shorter, but you can't cut it longer...  :-)  Works great.  Don't get the
fiberglass one.


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: 160-10m broadbanded dipole--too good to be true?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <468qtq$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 14:45:14 GMT
Lines: 20

In article <468qtq$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] wrote:
>I found in a ham catalog that just arrived an advertisement for
>broadbanded dipoles claiming to have no more than 2:1 SWR on all
>bands, at least on the 80-10 version (90 feet long) and the 160-10
>version (also 90 feet long).  These are fed directly with 50 ohm
>coax, and cost around 180 dollars.  What's the catch?  I want to
>go from a nonresonant reactive G5RV to something resonant and to
>something that will give me access to all bands my transceiver
>can work (160-10).  I'm tempted.  Any comments?  --Bill KB8USZ
>[e-mail]
---------------------------------------------------
Several years ago there was a similar antenna that achieved low SWR by
strategic use of resistors and L/C networks.  In effect it was a dummy load
with some radiating capability.  It mercifully disappeared, but it sounds like
someone may have reincarnated it....


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.nic.surfnet.nl!sun4nl!inter.nl.net!waasdorp
From: Coen Waasdorp <[e-mail]>
Subject: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ldn99-7.leiden.nl.net
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News at news)
Organization: NL Net
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.06 <V3qIi1cDYF6SVYARD7$C+H0$PN>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 14:56:19 GMT
Lines: 21

I was wondering whether a 2 element beam for 10-15-20 used in a
vertical fashion would operate as a vertical half wave antenna with the
added advantage of "beaming" the signal.

Does anyone have any experience using a 2 element beam in this fashion?

What would be the effect of the mast, which will be in between the
bottom half dipoles of this vertical arrangement, on the tuning and
(beam) efficiency?

Any comments and suggestions are welcome.

Due to lack of space I would not be possible to utilize a beam in the
normal horizontal fashion. My neighbours would not agree :-(, and the
xyl is also not to enthousiastic <gr>.

73

--
Coen Waasdorp
PA0COE


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 02:44:07 GMT
Lines: 12

: I was wondering whether a 2 element beam for 10-15-20 used in a
: vertical fashion would operate as a vertical half wave antenna with the
: added advantage of "beaming" the signal.

Yes it would work. Lots of CB antennas use this method. It would be
"ground sensitive" and probably work best with the center about 1/2
wavelength above ground which puts it a bit low which means you need some
open space around it for good radiation. The problems will be water
getting traped in your traps. They were'nt designed to be vertical and no
drain holes are provided in the ends.
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:46 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news.nic.surfnet.nl!sun4nl!inter.nl.net!waasdorp
From: Coen Waasdorp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ldn99-7.leiden.nl.net
Message-ID: <CSBK$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News at news)
Organization: NL Net
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.06 <V3qIi1cDYF6SVYARD7$C+H0$PN>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 19:27:03 GMT
Lines: 30

In article <[e-mail]>, Steve Ellington
<[e-mail]> writes
>: I was wondering whether a 2 element beam for 10-15-20 used in a
>: vertical fashion would operate as a vertical half wave antenna with the
>: added advantage of "beaming" the signal.
>
>Yes it would work. Lots of CB antennas use this method. It would be
>"ground sensitive" and probably work best with the center about 1/2
>wavelength above ground which puts it a bit low which means you need some
>open space around it for good radiation. The problems will be water
>getting traped in your traps. They were'nt designed to be vertical and no
>drain holes are provided in the ends.

Steve,

Tks for your input.

The 1/2 wavelength above the ground worries me a bit. For the 20 mtrs
this would be  OK, however for the 15 and 10 the location would be then
too high.

Having it lower positioned, this would not enable me to radiate over the
top of the townhouses where I am living.

Any particular reason of the 1/2 wavelenght height restriction?

73
--
Coen Waasdorp
PA0COE


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!pendragon.jsc.nasa.gov!ames!titan.ksc.nasa.gov!kscdl1.cad.ksc.nasa.gov!k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov!user
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie)
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 13:28:54 -0400
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Nntp-Posting-Host: k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov
Lines: 25

In article <[e-mail]>, Coen Waasdorp
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> What would be the effect of the mast, which will be in between the
> bottom half dipoles of this vertical arrangement, on the tuning and
> (beam) efficiency?

Coen-

The mast does act as another element, not necessarily to your advantage.
The effect would be an irregular radiation pattern.  The front-to-back
ratio might be degraded.  There might also be additional lobes introduced.

This is a common problem on VHF, where it can be prevented by mounting the
antenna at right angles to a boom, which is mounted to the mast, with
separation between the antenna and the mast.  You will often see a pair of
vertical VHF beams, balanced one on each side of the mast.  I doubt this
approach would be compatible with your space requirements.

Vertical VHF beams are sometimes mounted on insulated masts, with the
co-ax spiraled around the mast.  The inductance of the spiraled co-ax
decouples it from the antenna.  This approach might be effective in your
installation, if sufficient inductance could be achieved.  I'm not sure
what kind of insulated mast would be strong enough to support such a beam.

73, Fred, K4DII


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:48 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!server2.rz.uni-leipzig.de!news.uni-jena.de!prakinf2.PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
Date: 25 Oct 1995 13:43:46 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <46leui$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>Yes it would work. Lots of CB antennas use this method.

I hope these tow statements are only accidentally in one line.
If being used in CB proves or indicates that somthing works...
..Have to rush off and get an echo mike!

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!erik
From: [e-mail] (Erik Swekel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m Horzontal or Horizontal/Vertical for SSB
Date: 26 Oct 1995 21:57:21 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <46p081$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: valhalla.umd.umich.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Hey there, I'm in the market for a beam for 2m sideband, I was wondering
if anyone had any suggestions for a beam that isn't overly large, but
performs well.  Your input is appreciated, E-Mail or Post, I'll get it
either way, thanks...

73 de N8QLS

--
____________________________________________

Erik Swekel ([e-mail])
GSTA GSRA University of Michigan - Dearborn
Office: [phone]
WWW: http://ups10.umd.umich.edu/~erik
____________________________________________


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.wwwi.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!jamiel.primenet.com!jamiel
From: [e-mail] (Jerry A. Miel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 80 meter beam for sale
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 08:45:48 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip166.tus.primenet.com
Keywords: 80 meter beam for sale
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

I have a KLM 3.8-4 antenna for sale.  This is the largest beam antenna ever
made.  It has 4 elements on 80 meters.  The boom is 74 feet and is 6 inch
diameter in the center.  The elements are 90 feet long.  This antenna has
never been installed and has been in storage since new.  There are a few small
parts missing including 1/2 of one element.  It should be no problem to
replace the missing parts from standard stock.  Asking $1500 if you pick it up
in Tucson, AZ.  Extra cost if it has to be crated for shipping.  Jerry Miel.
phone [phone].  [e-mail].


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:51 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: 9913 Flexable Enough to Rotators?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <46fgg3$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 17:41:35 GMT
Lines: 4

213 is ok. 9913 is 9ga solid center conductor. With that stuff, you don't
even need a tower!
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!dsi.unimi.it!berlioz.crs4.it!uthscsa.edu!MUENZLERK
From: [e-mail] ("Muenzler, Kevin")
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 9913 Flexable Enough to Rotators?
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 10:29 -0500 (CDT)
Organization: CRS4, Center for Adv. Studies, Research and Development in Sardinia
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: crs4gw.crs4.it
Originator: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (HeadShrnkr) writes:

>Hello, I was wondering if anyone had any experience with 9913 in an Oscar
>system? Is this cable flexable enough to be used in a rotating tracking
>system that is on 24 hours per day? I currently have RG8 which is flexable
>enough but the SWR goes through the roof after it has been in use for a
>few months, it seems the center insulator can not handle the stress. I was
>considering RG213 or 9913 for replacment, any suggestions?

>Tnx, Bruce KB2VKJ


I had the same problem.  I used 9913 up to the base of the rotor and
then put a barrel connector and used RG8/X from there  to the
antenna.  Works great, haven't had any problems.  Just make sure
that the connection is sealed.

Kevin, WB5RUE
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:52 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!slay
From: [e-mail] (Sandy Lynch)
Subject: ??? on AEA SWR-121 Ant. Analzyer
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 07:28:30 GMT
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]

Anybody care to offer comments on the accuracy, reliability,
practical use, etc. of the AEA SWR-121 Antenna Analyzer ... and
its companion s/w - AA.COM??

Thanks
Sandy WA6BXH
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mel.aone.net.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!news.uwa.edu.au!classic.iinet.com.au!hades.omen.com.au!news
From: David Sorrel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Advice on good mobile antenna for IC-706 HF rig wanted.
Date: 26 Oct 1995 01:36:12 GMT
Organization: Omen Computer Services, Perth, Western Australia
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <46momc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vk6vw.omen.com.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (M. Davies) wrote:
>
>
>
>  Hello all. This the first mobile HF rig I've ever owned so I have zero
>experience with good mobile antennas. The store I got the radio from said
>all the Comet antennas were okay for HF. Are they? How about the mount?
>Since I have a car that must take me to work daily and will NOT have any
>holes drilled in it (Nissan 300ZXTT, Stage 3) the mount's a problem.
>
>  How about transmit wattage and the cars brain-boxes? The 706 will do
>100watts on HF. Can this much RF hurt the cars CPU?
>
>  Any help at all would be great. Thanks.
>
>
>                                               M. Davies
> ( As seen in the Farmers Almanac.)


Terlin Antennas has a new Outbacker made for the 706.  The new antenna
goes 160-2 meters.  But I don't think the 2 meters part is that useful.
Anyway the 706 has a separate 2 meter ant. output.  I am happy with my
Outbackers.  I use two and they are very efficient.

2 meter mounts should not be much of a problem.  Is your Nissan
fiberglass?  If not and you want temp attachment use a magnetic mount.
For HF you will need a substantial base depending on your ant. selection.
 They do make large mag. mounts maybe sutiable for HF but I would be
suspect.  You can use your trailer hitch.  Maybe have one mounted just
for Ant.  Or have a custom frame made off the back that is removable like
a class III hitch.  Last option is one of the "learn to love the look"
automatic tume all band jobs from SGC?  I can mount on you trunk with
straps and be removed.  But maybe more expensive.

I like the dual Outbackers.  I can set two bands and they work well.

David, VK6VW



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: AERIALS
Date: 23 Oct 95 19:02:53 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <EFC82452@MHS>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Hello net.
I am looking for a book titled Aerials by Kurt N. Sterba & Lil Paddle.
I have AERIALS II but missed the first one.

Any help ?
73, Roland WF4P/AAR2AA
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mel.aone.net.au!OzEmail!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: All band cw antenna
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 07:55:10 GMT
Organization: Private Subscriber
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <46a9hc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slcan1p03.ozemail.com.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin) wrote:

>[e-mail] (Dana Myers) wrote:
>>
>> A really neat way to build an antenna that is wideband with respect
>> to CW sending speed is to use multicolored wire.  Usually you just
>>
>You need to be REALLY careful with this multicolored wire!
>If the stripe runs the length of the wire, no spiral, then there
>usually is no problem.  If the stripe runs around the wire in
>a spiral fashion then there are three concerns:
>1 - The stripes on both sides of the dipole MUST be the same color.
>    If not you may have multi-spectral distortion on your outgoing
>    signal.  This usually doesn't affect incoming signals because

>Other than that striped wires like the 28gauge Bell(tm) wire works just
>find for dipoles.

You guys have got me worried.  One, I only just saw this thread, and I
may have inadvertently transmitted some spectrally distorted signals
without realising it, this month.
Two, it occurs to me that due to the shape of the wire I've used for
my antenna, it's actually a mobius loop.  This explains the funny SWR
readings I've had ever since I changed to the new spectrally correct
wire.  I suppose the signals can't help coming back, given the
spectral problems this has revealed.

Um, maybe I'll go back to 3600 bd packet for a while.

Cheers,


Andrew Davis --VK1DA--Canberra, Australia---Information Technology
Consultant  * User Documentation * Windows Help design
Acceptance Testing  *  Software Reviews  *  Strategic Planning  *



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!news.tek.com!netman.ens.tek.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Terry Burge)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: aluminum wire on quad
Date: 25 Oct 1995 10:18:47 -0700
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR, USA
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <46lrhn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: netman.ens.tek.com

I just got up my Lightning Bolt 5 band 20-10 quad and want to adjust it
for maximum gain but I don't have any aluminum wire to make adjustable
stubs. Is copper wire OK to use with the aluminum or would something else
be better? Other than Radio Shack 8 guage aluminum I don't know of a local
source for aluminum wire. Trying to avoid problems with disimilar metals.

Terry
KI7M



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:57 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Sparks)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: aluminum wire on quad
Date: 27 Oct 1995 14:19:22 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <46qppa$[e-mail]>
References: <46lrhn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-hou5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Oct 27  7:19:22 AM PDT 1995

In <46lrhn$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Terry
Burge) writes:
>
>I just got up my Lightning Bolt 5 band 20-10 quad and want to adjust
it
>for maximum gain but I don't have any aluminum wire to make adjustable
>stubs. Is copper wire OK to use with the aluminum or would something
else
>be better? Other than Radio Shack 8 guage aluminum I don't know of a
local
>source for aluminum wire. Trying to avoid problems with disimilar
metals.
>
>Terry
>KI7M
>

You will have corrosion problems with copper and aluminum.  This can be
helped with NO-OX or some other non oxidizing material.

You can get aluminum wire of different guages at a farm supply store in
the electric fence section, of course the minimum lenght is usually a
couple hundred feet.

Sparky  KI5GY


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:58 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna 400 ft from rig
Date: 21 Oct 1995 20:11:19 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46bk57$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
Richard Barnaby <[e-mail]> wrote:

>He had mentioned that *someone* had told him that if you could use
>a rule-of-thumb that if you got 1 foot of rise for every 1 foot of run
>that you should take the loss.  Since his (and your) situation is
>*well* over that, then according to such wisdom, you should do it.
>Perhaps others can comment on this *rule-of-thumb* with more
>scientific thinking

Hi Richard, before we comment, please tell us how you manage to get
more than "1 foot of rise for every 1 foot of run". :-) And I don't
think that 200 ft of RG-58 on 440 would radiate much of a signal
even if the tower were 200 ft high.

If it were me, I would use 300 ohm ladder-line on that tri-bander
with quick connect serial or parallel stubs at the transmitter
to bring the impedance to 50 ohms. Low SWR seen by the transmitter
and acceptable losses in the inexpensive transmission line.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:24:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.wwwi.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!ip247.phx.primenet.com!w5gyj
From: [e-mail] (James E. Bromley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Brand-X Autotuner, Brand-Y Radio?
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 19:22:51 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <45oehl$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip247.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <[e-mail]>
Bill Harwood, AB6DY <[e-mail]> writes:

>The SGC-230 could care less about what radio it is connected to.  Just
>hook up the COAX and transmit.

True enough.  The trick is to get the radio to think it has its
own brand of antenna tuner connected and to thereby enable the
"AT TUNE" front panel button and "Tuned" indicator on the dial.
It's a small convenience to key up with a 10-watt carrier to
set the SGC-230 and have the SGC-230 unkey the radio automagically.

Jim, W5GYJ





From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:00 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!miwok!usenet
From: John English <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Compact ant for Dual HT
Date: 22 Oct 1995 17:47:00 GMT
Organization: North Bay Network, Inc. news server - not responsible for content
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <46e02k$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: castles16.castles.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

I use the Maldol 209s 'Active Hunter' dualband duck for my FT-530 and
FT51r. This duck is about 2 inches tall and performes almost as good as
the original duckies that came with the HT's. Price is about $20 each at
swaps. There is another product from Comet call 'Miracal Baby' about 1
inch tall and cost around $30-$40. The Comet does not work well. Best use
as a 50 Ohm dummy load.

J.English KC6VLG



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:01 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usr4ip44.azstarnet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Mandaville)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Compact ant for Dual HT
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 19:42:19 +0600
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr4ip44.azstarnet.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Phi-Ho Tran) wrote:


> Is the ANLI AL-800 a good choice?

I received my ANLI Al-800 this evening.  I haven't tried it yet for
transmitting, but it certainly gives good results when receiving with my
Yaesu FT-51R HT.  Using the short rubber duck extension on the bottom
unit, the AL-800 is NOT as good as the original FT-51R dual band rubber
duck.  Mounting the upper extension, however, and pulling it out to full
length gives a remarkable increase in signal strength on both 2 m and 70
cm.  The LCD S-meter reading on the FT-51 is about triple what it is with
the stock antenna.  I have no doubt that  results on transmit will be
similar.  The HT is a bit awkward to carry with the Al-800 extended, but I
expect it will be very useful as a quick add-on when extra radiated power
is required.  73 Amateur Radio Today magazine, issue of Feb. 1992, carried
a review of this antenna giving it high marks.

73, Jim, KG5KP


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Counterpoise vs. radials
Date: 25 Oct 1995 10:07:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 32
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46lgaf$[e-mail]>
References: <46jgms$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <46jgms$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:

>
>Would a counterpoise for a multiband vertical (such as my Butternut
>HF6V) be worth getting instead of using tuned radial wires?  When I
>put the vertical on the roof of this rental twinplex I would like
>to keep all my antenna paraphenalia on my side of the house, and
>as low profile as possible.  The multiband dipole I strung across
>the roof is giving the neighbors front-end overload, and the
>ground-mounted vertical did likewise.  I'm hoping to consolidate
>my antenna options and just use one multiband vertical, with one
>of those strange-looking X-within-a-square counterpoises, on our
>side of the house.  Maybe then I can run 5, 50 or 500 watts with
>impunity, given that the doughnut of RF energy will take off well
>above the roof.  --Bill KB8USZ [e-mail]

Hi Bill,

Remember the current divides between the radials, and radiation is a
function of the current.

So if you had one radial per band, the field from the radial would equal
the field from the antenna's main element.

Since the neighbor's equipment is all within the near field of the system,
the best approach would be to use a lot of radials. Then the current and
near field radiation from each radial is minimized.

73 Tom




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: current xfmr toroids
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 95 00:48:25 GMT
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <46jl4m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:

>After following the discussion about current transformer toroids,
>I would like to offer an opinion, if you all don't mind.  The
>coefficient of coupling from the through wire depends a lot less
>on core permeability than on the physical geometry.

I agree completely.  IMO, the permeability issue is only a significant
factor as it relates to the XL of the secondary winding.

>My homemade directional coupler transformers have achieved k of 0.98
>(measured) using mu=10 type 2 cores.  The geometry was to use
>a longer core (two stacked T80-2 cores) that helps to reduce
>fringing effects.

How important is this when two toroids are being used ot measure
relative current differences on both sides of the line?

>Reducing capacity coupling by using a Faraday shield, grounded to
>the ground side of the output coil, was found to be crucial.  Pure
>inductive coupling is necessary for any kind of *current* transformer.

This is the second time I've seen this mentioned.  I'm not sure I
understand the physical construction or how this would be applied to a
relatively small toroid (d < 0.5").  Could you provide a more detailed
description of the shield?  Also, like above, is this important if two
toroids are used for relative measurements only?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newshub.cts.com!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us!SABINW
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: current xfmr toroids
Date: 24 Oct 1995 21:17:10 GMT
Organization: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Cedar Rapids, IA,  52401
Lines: 15
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46jl4m$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us

After following the discussion about current transformer toroids,
I would like to offer an opinion, if you all don't mind.  The
coefficient of coupling from the through wire depends a lot less
on core permeability than on the physical geometry.  My homemade
directional coupler transformers have achieved k of 0.98
(measured) using mu=10 type 2 cores.  The geometry was to use
a longer core (two stacked T80-2 cores) that helps to reduce
fringing effects.  Reducing capacity coupling by using a
Faraday shield, grounded to the ground side of the output coil,
was found to be crucial.  Pure inductive coupling is necessary
for any kind of *current* transformer.  Simulations verified
this belief. The important thing is that the H field created
by the current in the thru-wire couples into the core efficiently.
This is more a problem of geometry than permeability, I believe.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: current xfmr toroids
Date: 25 Oct 1995 10:07:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46lgae$[e-mail]>
References: <46jl4m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <46jl4m$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] writes:

>to the ground side of the output coil,
>was found to be crucial.  Pure inductive coupling is necessary
>for any kind of *current* transformer.  Simulations verified
>this belief.

Right on.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ultranet.com!k1log.ultranet.com!commo
From: [e-mail] (Norm Commo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dipole SWR Characteristics Question
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 19:01:55 GMT
Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: k1log.ultranet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

>Problem:
>I have an inverted V Dipole for 40 meters that tunes
>well at 7.2 (500 Watts forward, 2 watts back)

>but at 7.0 is horrid (500 watts forward  150 watts back)

>Is this frequency sensitivity normal?

Well, at 3.4:1 it does indeed seem high.  I could easily understand something
around 2:1 when a 40M atnenna optimized at one end of the band is played at
the other end.

Any number of things could be contributing to the problem.  You would certainly
want to check that the angle between the wires (as view in the plane of the two
wires was at least greater than 90 degrees and preferably greater than 120
degrees.  I have experienced problems with inverted-vees when the inclusion
angle has been too small - typically hard to tune and narrower in bandwidth.

-ricK1log


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:08 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jgardner
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Gardner)
Subject: Re: Dipole SWR Characteristics Question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 19:33:33 GMT
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]

Richard Barnaby ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I've inherited a system that I can operate, but is not mine.
: I can't change much if anything, and I didn't install it.

: Problem:
: I have an inverted V Dipole for 40 meters that tunes
: well at 7.2 (500 Watts forward, 2 watts back)

: but at 7.0 is horrid (500 watts forward  150 watts back)


The antenna is too short at 7.0 MHz. What I did in a similar case was
to attach alligator clips to two pieces of wire and clipped one of these
to each end of the dipole when I wanted to operate the low end of
40 meters. I cut the wire pieces too long and trimed them for minimum
SWR at 7.0 MHz.

--
Jerry Gardner          | Maintainer of the Large Format Digest
[e-mail]    | Send subscription requests to [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:08 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (DedElvis01)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DISCONE in 73 Mag, anyone try it ????
Date: 25 Oct 1995 19:10:27 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46mg53$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DedElvis01)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I just saw the discone antenna in last months issue of 73 and was
wondering if anyone has tried it ????


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:09 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!engr.orst.edu!news.PEAK.ORG!billn
From: [e-mail] (Bill Nelson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Dummy load
Date: 23 Oct 1995 08:46:17 GMT
Organization: CS Outreach Services, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <46fkop$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: peak.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I am planning for the future, and need a dummy load that will handle full
legal power on HF.  Is there a relatively easy way to build one?

I know about using light bulbs, but would rather avoid the impedance
problems.

I currently have a Gold Line 100 watt air cooled dummy load. Would it be
possible to immerse this in some oil (possibly mineral) to increase the
dissipation?

Bill



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:10 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!jgardner
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Gardner)
Subject: Re: Ever-changing G5RV behavior
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <4630bq$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 19:15:39 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]

[e-mail] wrote:

:   Another question about the notorious G5RV:  why do the
: instructions included with the Van Gordon G5RV say to use at least
: 70' of coax "in order for the antenna to perform properly"?

Because the higher the loss in the feedline, the lower the measured SWR
at the rig! This doesn't affect antenna performance, however.


--
Jerry Gardner          | Maintainer of the Large Format Digest
[e-mail]    | Send subscription requests to [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!server2.rz.uni-leipzig.de!news.uni-jena.de!prakinf2.PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Folded Marconi
Date: 25 Oct 1995 10:45:02 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <46l4fe$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

In article <[e-mail]>,
PAUL LOVE <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Recently there was an article published down here in "VK", extolling
>the virtues of a "folded marconi".(Radio & Communications Oct'95,
>Superior Marconi's by Steve Ireland ).

Paul,

My advice is, dont build this antenna, it is not worth the trouble.

First there is little to gain from replacing the single vertical
element by a folded one. the feed point impedance increases, but
claims that this enhances radiation significantly are incorrect.

As to the radials, the stakes at the end are useless (may be they decrease
risks from lightning, but there are more cost effective methods).
There are for a vertical to ways to provide a good ground plane:
about 100 1/4 wl radials at ground level or a few (4) about 1/4 wl up.
the latter brings the total antenna height up to 1/2 wl!

Ther radials on the ground are not resonant, while the elevated are.

As to the performance of verticals compared to horizontal antennas
(dipoles, inverted vees, quad loops) the experiences and opinions
are a bit controversal. Results (experiments and simulations) I am aware
off indicate that at good ground conduction a vertical will work
better than a horizontal (both with the highest point at 1/4 wl)
that the radiation pattern of the vertical is however strongyl influenced by
the ground conduction (independent of the radial system), so that over poorly
conducting ground ther horizontal antenna works better.

73, Moritz DL5UH



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:13 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Folded Marconi
Date: 25 Oct 1995 15:35:34 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46m3i6$[e-mail]>
References: <46l4fe$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Paul,

In article <[e-mail]>,
PAUL LOVE <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Recently there was an article published down here in "VK", extolling
>the virtues of a "folded marconi".(Radio & Communications Oct'95,
>Superior Marconi's by Steve Ireland ).
>

I see the same thing many times over and over. In the West Coast  (W6SAI)
Handbook, Lew McCoy's stuff, and the ARRL Antenna compendiums. It seems a
lot of good writers are confused about that!

Radiation resistance and feedpoint resistance are two entirely different
things. Folding an antenna (as in a folded dipole) raises the feedpoint
resistance, but not the radiation resistance as related to the total loss
resistance! It all remains the same.

So unless the reason is to match the feedline better, you are wasting time
and effort. Folding the element (per se) does NOT reduce ground loss or
improve efficiency one bit! It is a Myth.

73 Tom W8JI


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (PAUL LOVE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Folded Marconi
Date: 25 Oct 95 06:36:51 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Recently there was an article published down here in "VK", extolling
the virtues of a "folded marconi".(Radio & Communications Oct'95,
Superior Marconi's by Steve Ireland ).

I was particularly interested in the potential of this antenna for 40
metres for my suburban block. I'm currently using a dipole,and have
tried zepps& double zepps, all are less than satisfactory, but I have
witnessed very good reports for similar powered stations as mine
using vertical antennas ( DX operation ).

The format of this antenna is a 1/4 wave wire vertical antenna folded
back on itself, held apart by spacers, the return end is joined to an
array of 16 x 3 metre radials all (ideally) terminated with 90cm earth
stakes, grid-dipped in pairs. The antenna is suspended from a tree or
wooden pole, feed by ladder-line, or coax via tuning stub.

My Concerns:

The cost:- What originally looked like a reasonably inexpensive, but
useful wire antenna escaladed with the addition of 16 earth stakes ,
( price check $9.95 each) , that's 159.20 before one metre of wire,
coax, or 36 odd foot support pole have been purchased.
How important are those stakes ?? Is it a fair return for $160.00 ??
or is the difference (if any), marginal ?

The Space needed:- All those radials fanning out across the back garden
(XYL....Hmmmmmm ! )

My plan was to erect support pole at the "head" ("end") of our small
garden bed and fan out the radials above the ground. Plant small shrubs
and install a sprinkler system in the garden. In short time the radials
would be obscured by the flowering Australian Native shrubs (something
to discuss in rec.gardening *8-)  ), and the ground would always be
moist due to the sprinkler system and ground cover.

TVI & BCI :- Despite claims to the contrary by many experts (Paul H.Lee
Vertical Antenna Handbook ), I have suffered more such problems with
verticals ( and end-fed ant's), than any other type of antenna. With
this antenna mounted at ground zero, and neighboring buildings looming
high all around, I would be concerned at the high probability of TVI
etc. in these adjacent dwellings.

This article claims "superior" DX performance from this antenna , and
with band conditions as poor as they are, I can see many years of heavy
work ahead for a "really good" antenna for the lower bands.
Any commentary on this design would be appreciated as this style of
antenna may suit the requirements of many "suburban" amateurs, who
still like to work some "DX" on the lower bands.


 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Internet : [e-mail]        | ** Amateur Radio :-           |
|Packet   : vk4xd@vk4itm.#bne.qld.aus.oc    | National Park of the Mind **  |
|Amprnet  : vk4xd.ampr.org                  | ------------------------------|
|IP       : 44.136.138.118                  | **The Truth is Out There **   |
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------





From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!unix.sri.com!news.Stanford.EDU!tip-mp7-ncs-1.Stanford.EDU!michaelx
From: [e-mail] (Michael G. Barbitta)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Garmin 45 GPS antenna
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 14:29:07
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tip-mp7-ncs-1.stanford.edu

I have a Garmin GPS 45 and the external antenna price is too high.  Does
anybody know how to make a good antenna for both boat and car use ?
It's easy enough to take the installed antenna off an connect it with a short
length of coax, but I'd really rather have something I could leave permanently
installed and then just hook the receiver up to it.

Michael G. Barbitta
KD6OAY


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wem.org!badboy!danny.barker
From: [e-mail] (Danny Barker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Grand Opening...........
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 15:38:57 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: THE BAD BOY BBS!  310.378.3081   310.915.5862
Distribution: world
Lines: 23


Well It's been a while since I mentioned it, and after having some
problems, IT'S FINALLY HERE!!!!

                  THE GRAND OPEN of L.A. COMM CENTER

             Located at 12808 Paramount Blvd. in Downey, CA.

We are the NEWEST Amateur radio store in Southern California. Come on
Down and have some.......(OPPS!!! that's a surprise) :) Maybe You might
WIN a new YAESU FT-530 as well as some other goodies. The Grand opening
will be after the TRW swap meet Oct. 28th. at HIGH-NOON (12 O'clock). If
you are coming from the TRW swap meet, Take the 105-freeway East and get
off at the Garfield off ramp, cross Garfield until you come to the
next light, that's Paramount Blvd, make a left turn and go 8 blocks
North and we will be on your right. Parking in the street or lot.

                            Don't miss out!!!!!

Hope to see all there!!!!

                                   Danny Barker KC6VMG
---
 * QMPro 1.52 * The DARN thing says "PRESS ANY KEY" where's the ANY key?


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:18 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news3.insinc.net!cadvision.com!usenet
From: John Fallows <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help IONCAP
Date: 22 Oct 1995 15:27:46 GMT
Organization: CADVision
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <46dnti$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cadb53.cadvision.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Can anyone help me locate a (public domain) version of IONCAP which
supports Method 12 (Adjustment for magnetic indices using K Index)?  I
have been using VOACAP which is a useful implementation of IONCAP except
for the lack of support for method 12.  (It also does not support LUF,
but that can be inferred from system loss.)

Suggestions appreciated.  Thanks.  73.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:18 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!ks4op.mindspring.com!ks4op
From: [e-mail] (stephen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: help: traps
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 15:16:53 -0400
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ks4op.mindspring.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B]

 I have a triband yagi and have been having alot of trouble getting it to
  tune up. my question is, is there a way to check out traps. I have
  inspected them and they look new. I got the antenna used and any help you
  could give me would be greatly appreciated.

   thanks stephen ks4op


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:19 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Beverages [was: Rombic (sic) antenna questions]
Date: 25 Oct 1995 15:34:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46m3gt$[e-mail]>
References: <46j5rq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Frank,

I never heard of multi element Beverages using hundreds of elements. Can
you exand on that? Here is part of a reply I posted in the Rhombic thread.

>Gain isn't everything on receive. Usually what counts is signal to noise
>or signal to interference ratios and receive-only antennas such as
>Beverages can knock the socks off most other antenna designs in this
>respect.

Actually directivity is what improves the S/N ratio at HF. A lack of gain
can
generally be made up in a pre-amplifier. Long wire arrays have among the
lowest gain and directivity of any form of directional array. Two phased
end-fire loop antennas spaced as little as 1/10 wl apart actually have
more
directivity than a 1 wl Beverage. My 4 element loop array is 210 feet
long,
and on quiet nights it is considerably better than my 1 wl Beverage. If
there
are thunderstorms off the back side of the arrays, the loops are over 20dB
quieter than the Beverages.

>Yes they can't be rotated but then they are cheap!

Ahh, and easy to install. That is why they still appear in Amateur use,
and
is certainly a real advantage! Ther's no doubt long wire arrays are the
easiest constructed arrays.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:21 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.flinet.com!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do I tune the SWR on a dual band antenna?
Date: 23 Oct 1995 05:42:29 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 33
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46fa05$[e-mail]>
References: <45m9eb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip106.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail]╚ says...
>
>
>BB>I am just getting into HAM and I've just installed a mobile
>BB>2m/70cm dual band LARSEN antenna on my car. When I
>
>I have 2 of those antennas, one on my truck and the other on my 4
>wheeler.  I was told when I bought them that they are pre-tuned and not
>to worry about it.  I've been using them for a couple years now and no
>problems yet.
>---
> ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ I know a good tag line when I steal one

How did they know where on your car or truck you were going to install the
antenna in order to tune it for that location and relationship to the body
mass of your vehicle.

Must I assume that everything I have learned in 35+ years is bogus and that
a relationship between nearby objects does not exist and is no longer
relevant?

I know the number of elements are exactly 97 no more no less, I was taught
that in school too, but my kids tell me that there are now many more.  Could
it be that the teachers don't know there @$$ from an element?

Maybe the electrical field cancels out the magnetic field and are not
running the 90 degrees opposed.

Somebody HELP Me!

Gary - N0ZOI



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:21 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!wa2ise
From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: Re: How do I tune the SWR on a dual band antenna?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <45m9eb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <46fa05$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 16:43:13 GMT
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]

 I would worry about the SWR on the higher band, because you will loose
more reflected power due to coax attenuation being higher on higher
frequencies.  So work on the higher band, and check the lower band
occasionally to make sure it's not becomming awful.

As for commercial amateur mag mount antennas, the design isn't much
bothered by the size of the roof of your car.  A larger than 1/4
wave groundplane doesn't hurt.  At least not worth worrying about.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:22 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!mv!usenet
From: Steve Berry <[e-mail]>
Subject: I Need a SwitchBox for 2 antennas and 2 radio inputs for IC706
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: strafford.mv.com
Sender: [e-mail] (Paul Hurley)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Strafford Technology, Inc.
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 15:30:33 GMT
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 39


I am anxiously awaiting the arrival of a IC-706.

I have a problem though... It has 2 antenna inputs one for
2 and the other for 6/HF. I have a V2000 (2/6) and
an R7 (HF)...

Rather than buy a duplexer and a switch I would like to
buy a single switch that switches the two inputs to the
other but always has each antenna connected to the rig:

Switch Position 1

Ant    2/6 ANT             HF ANT
         |                   |
         |                   |    HF/2 Position
IC706   2 Mtr              6/HF


Switch Position 2

Ant    2/6 ANT             HF ANT
          |                |
            |          |
              |     |
                 |           6 Meter position
              |     |
            |          |
           |              |
IC706   2 Mtr              6/HF

This took a lot of work to draw so I hope someone knows the
answer!

Thanks in advance

Steve




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:23 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.erinet.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!usenet
From: jaeschke <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: I Need a SwitchBox for 2 antennas and 2 radio inputs for IC706
Date: 25 Oct 1995 11:51:16 GMT
Organization: Eaton Corporation
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <46l8bk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jaeschke.mke.etn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 32bit)

>

Steve:

I used a switch that can be ordered from the E&B Marine Catalog
to connect either my 2 meter or marine radio to the antenna on
top of the mast or a half wave antenna on the stern.  It works
great, but I am not sure how long it will last.  During my
search I was told that one of the better switch manufactures
had made such an device, but no longer did.  I looked and
looked at Ham fests, but never did find one.

Jim




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:24 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!newsserver.rdcs.Kodak.COM!usenet
From: Andy Jeutter <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Indoor antenna for HF
Date: 23 Oct 1995 12:45:35 GMT
Organization: Eastman Kodak Company
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <46g2pf$[e-mail]>
References: <jimwrigh-1910951159070001@47.34.5.74>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgpc3.ag01.kodak.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jim,

give a magnetic loop a try. Objects in the vicinity of the ant
do not influence it and 80 m is no problem. BUT, be aware of
the RF when transmiting!

73, Andy DL4SEI



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:25 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: Indoor antenna for HF
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <jimwrigh-1910951159070001@47.34.5.74>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 13:17:51 GMT
Lines: 34

In article <jimwrigh-1910951159070001@47.34.5.74>,
   [e-mail] (Jim Wright) wrote:
>
>
>     Does anyone have any suggestions or experience with indoor
>     antennas for HF use. I now that this is a last resort, but
>     I would appreciate any information on what to try and what
>     to avoid in this area. And, would 80M or 40M be out of the
>     question?
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Jim, VE3WYO
---------------------------------------------------------
I used attic dipoles for several years and had good luck with them.  I was in
a two story apartment, so the extra height helped.  I tried connecting the
dipoles in parallel so I could use only one feedline, but there was too much
interaction between them, so I eventually ran individual lines and that worked
fine.  The longest one I had was for 40 meters with the ends bent at an angle,
but an 80 meter one with loading coils is quite feasible.

You might also consider the Isoloop type antenna made by AEA and MFJ.  They
word very well but do have a pretty narrow bandwidth, so you need to retune
whenever you QSY.  Also, their power handling capability is limited to about
150 watts.

If you're in an apartment like I was, be prepared for RFI problems, especially
on telephones.

I worked DXCC with the 'ol attic dipoles, so it can be done... Have fun!


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:26 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!iglou!iglou2!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: info with an apt ant
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou2.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <469sao$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 02:09:58 GMT
Lines: 3

MOVE
--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:27 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: info with an apt ant
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <469sao$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 10:24:21 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <469sao$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Steve Eizenberg) wrote:
>I live in an old apt building on the 4th floor the building is made of
>concrete and rebarb. the apt manager will not let me put any out side
>ant's does anyone have any ideas.
>
>
>steve
>
-------------------------------------------------------
An indoor dipole can work very well in that situation.  Being up on the 4th
floor is a definite advantage, too.  For the lower bands (40-160) you probably
will need to use a loading coil(s) -- see any ARRL antenna handbook for
details.

Another alternative is the small loop type antenna such as the ones made by
AEA and MFJ.  They work very well, but are limited to only about 150 watts and
only the higher frequency bands.

Have fun!!


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (JimSlavin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: International ham statistics--historical
Date: 25 Oct 1995 20:18:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46mk42$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JimSlavin)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I am looking for the number of ham radio operators worldwide broken out by
year since the beginning of this century.  I have been able to find
similar information for U.S. hams, but have hit a dead end with
international numbers.  Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Please respond directly by email to "[e-mail]"


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:29 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jgardner
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Gardner)
Subject: Re: Isotron Ant
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <45tp6q$[e-mail]> <45u2vo$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 19:26:09 GMT
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]

Watts ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I have the 160m version, and I was able to expand the <2:1SWR
: bandwidth with a transformer.  I like it!

Have you been able to make any contacts with it? Any DX contacts?



--
Jerry Gardner          | Maintainer of the Large Format Digest
[e-mail]    | Send subscription requests to [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:30 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole/Ground
Date: 21 Oct 1995 05:44:15 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <46a1bf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <469taa$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr3ip8.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

maurice norris <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> I just finished building my 2m J-Pole but I want to know if I need to ground
>> it.
>>
>> And If I need to ground it, how should I do it?
>>
>> The antenna is 8.5 feet High and is 10 feet lower than the highest point of
>> the roof.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Maxime Caron
>> [e-mail]
>>
>>
>       Hi there:
> The Jpole and supper Jpole are dc grounded antennas and do not need
>to be grounded. In fact if the antenna is grounded it will not change
>the swr from ungrounded.
> No need to ground this one and ungrounded it is less lic=kely to
>atract lightning.
>

How can they be at once DC grounded antennas but not grounded?  True,
if properly grounded, the SWR should not change but what has this to
do with safety. If ungrounded objects do not attract lightning, why
do aircraft suffer hits?

Because this antenna is fed with something other than optical fiber, there
is a connection to ground somewhere unless the rig is battery-powered.
In this case, Maxine is the ground path.

At a minimum, the bottom of the antenna should be bonded to ground with
a 8 AWG wire connected as directly as possible to a decent earth ground.
This will help discharge static buildup and may help prevent a full scale
stroke.  If a strike does occur, this simple system will likely be
inadequate to the task, but at least you tried.  It takes heroic efforts
to completely prevent damage, but you can minimize injury by keeping
the grounding system outside.  This means disconnecting the cabling when
the equipment is unused or storms are likely.

Lightning discharges have very fast rise times.  Because of this, they
possess high frequency components that behave just as any other RF signal
does. At the magnitude of current in a typical strike, any inductive reactance
will have a significant voltage drop across it even though the inductance
is very small. There can be thousands of volt gradients across things that
seem to be effectively grounded. This even includes things like well-grounded
towers, guy wires and the chassis of your radio. It's best to keep yourself
from acting as a current shunt across these things <g>

73, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!news.rcinet.com!sally.dma.org!dmapub.dma.org!peerenbf
From: Fred <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole/Ground
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 07:03:34 -0400
Organization: Dayton Microcomputer Association; Dayton, Ohio, USA
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <469taa$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dmapub.dma.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <469taa$[e-mail]>



On 21 Oct 1995, maurice norris wrote:

> >
> > I just finished building my 2m J-Pole but I want to know if I need to ground
> > it.
> >
> > And If I need to ground it, how should I do it?
> >
> > The antenna is 8.5 feet High and is 10 feet lower than the highest point of
> > the roof.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Maxime Caron
> > [e-mail]
> >
> >
>       Hi there:
>  The Jpole and supper Jpole are dc grounded antennas and do not need
> to be grounded. In fact if the antenna is grounded it will not change
> the swr from ungrounded.
>  No need to ground this one and ungrounded it is less lic=kely to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> atract lightning.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
OUCH!!!!!    what a dangerous statement.


>       Mo KC7EXG
>
>
Would you hook a lightning rod to ***YOUR***** rig???????  I guess in the
new license study books they do not talk much about "grounding" or maybe
the author of this response had a book that some one had cut that page
out of.

Fred   ke8tq


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:32 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.iii.net!news
From: "Thomas C. J. Sefranek" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole/Ground
Date: 25 Oct 1995 15:11:27 GMT
Organization: SRC
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <46lk3i$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wa1rhp.iii.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi Max,
       Yes, you can ground it for DC purposes, but it needs no RF ground
to "work".  That is, it is at least a 1/2 wave antenna, and as such,
is "complete".  But... All vertical antennas are helped by a good ground
plane.  So the answer is complex.

Tom
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:33 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.Edu.TW!news.cc.nctu.edu.tw!ccnews.nchu.edu.tw!news.fcu.edu.tw!news
From: [e-mail] (yanky)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole/Ground
Date: 25 Oct 1995 00:44:36 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <46k19l$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.83.188.155
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.4


Would somebody tell me ,where can I get the Jpole antenna informantion.
Thanks!!!!



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:34 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!primenet
From: [e-mail] (John S. Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: K6STI loop antenna
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 95 03:22:58 GMT
Organization: Department of Redundancy Dept.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <464g77$[e-mail]>
References: <45v0vj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip189.msp.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <45v0vj$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>In what mhat month QST is the K6STI low-noise contest loop article? I
have the sinking feeling it's the one my daughter fed to
>the trash disposal...  :(
>
>Could someone forward the details, please? Thanks.
>
Greg, I think that was September 1995. If it is, I built
one. The noise reduction was Phenomenal, but it sucked
for receiving DX signals compared to the noisy vertical
I was hoping to improve upon. Great for stateside QSO's
though. Good Luck, John.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:35 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!mv!wd1v.mv.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John Seney)
Subject: Mac Ham WWW
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: wd1v.mv.com
Sender: [e-mail] (Paul Hurley)
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 10:19:19 GMT
Lines: 44


Announcing New WWW Site for Macintosh Ham Radio Enthusiasts


http://www.mv.com/ipusers/wd1v


Mac Ham Software including:

Macnet Roster
a database of all hams in the world using Mac computers

WD1V's Ham Radio Test Simulators
the fast path for upgrading your ham license with a Mac

Plus more information - come see!


\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
John D. Seney, WD1V                Internet:      [e-mail]
144 Pepperidge Drive                    AOL:        [e-mail]
Manchester, NH 03103-6150         AX.25 Pkt: [e-mail]
(H) 603-668-1096                 TCP/IP Pkt:    [e-mail]

macnet world wide web home page:    http://www.mv.com/ipusers/wd1v

Macnet Roster -     "Whos Who" of all amateurs using Mac Computers
Macnet Test -       Amateur Radio Test Simulators
Macnet Collection - 10 Disks of Amateur Radio and Scientific Prgms

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

     LeCroy Corporation - Test and Measurment Sales Engineering
                Serving NE Massachusetts, NH, and ME
                     WWW http://www.lecroy.com
                           NASDAQ: (LCRY)
(O) 800-553-2769      (F) 603-627-1623    (P) 800-SKYPAGE #5956779

   All opinions are my own, including Digital Storage Scope.FAQ

 To obtain the latest copy automatically, simply send me an EMAIL
       with "subscribe scope.faq" in the subject field.
  or: WWW http://beam.slac.stanford.edu/www/library/w3/dso.html
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:36 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!castle.nando.net!news
From: [e-mail] (J)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Matchboxes and Tuner Parts
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 16:01:49 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <46aqtg$[e-mail]>
References: <9510191520.AA25837@dilbert>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail904.nando.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] wrote:

>Hi all-
>     Could anyone provide some more information on the contents of a
>'Johnson Matchbox'? I am curious to know exactly whats in one. Without
>actually having to find one, that is.
>
>     Also could someone recommend an inexpensive source for a couple of
>HV variable caps for a tuner?


        Lets see....

        2 variable caps
        1 tapped inductor
        relay
        switch

        I have 2 of the "250 watt" versions, that I'd be confident in using to
a full gallon of SSB. They are excellent tuners for 10-80m. For a good
laugh, compare a EFJ unit, with a MFJ (or any other comparable
modern tuner).

        /john



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:37 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Matchboxes and Tuner Parts
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 95 14:16:55 GMT
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <9510191520.AA25837@dilbert> <46aqtg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (J) wrote:

>       Lets see....
>
>       2 variable caps
>       1 tapped inductor
>       relay
>       switch

I just recently purchased a KW Matchbox.  Haven't had time to look
inside, but the schematics for both power levels show three split,
variable capacitors, not two.  Either two of them are mechanically
linked, or one is a 4-section variable.  (?)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:38 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MorGain Antennas
Date: 26 Oct 1995 22:01:57 GMT
Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <46p0gl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jackwy.clark.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11


        Does anyone know what happened to the MorGain antenna
company? They were around for quite awhile but have disappeared
now. They built a decent wire antenna and a friend of mine was
looking for them to buy a new one.

                 73's   Jack   WB3ICL



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cais.net!news.cais.com!cais2.cais.com!gttm
From: USCG TELECOMMS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MorGain Antennas
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 07:50:59 -0400
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <46p0gl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cais2.cais.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <46p0gl$[e-mail]>



On 26 Oct 1995, John Frank wrote:

>
>       Does anyone know what happened to the MorGain antenna
> company? They were around for quite awhile but have disappeared
> now. They built a decent wire antenna and a friend of mine was
> looking for them to buy a new one.
>
John:  Dean Morgan (W4GGS now silent key) was the inventor of the
antenna.  I talked with him quite frequently before he became a silent
key about 3 years ago.  He told me that he sold the rights to manufacture
the antenna, and indeed the antenna was advertised for sale by the new
owner until about 2 years before his death.  The fellow he sold the
rights to never paid Dean in full, so he took him to court to prevent him
from making profits on his patented antenna.  For all I know, the suit
may still be pending, therefore the reason you don't see the antenna
advertised anymore.  Dean also had patents on other antennas, for ship
use; he was successful in selling these to the US Navy.  Hope this helps.


Ron, W4VR


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:39 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: V$[e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: multiple antenna question
Date: 24 Oct 95 15:28:26 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

If I have a yagi antenna that let's say, gives me a signal of 1 microvolt at
the terminal. Would 4 yagis give me 4 microvolts or is there something going
on that would give me more?

Brian AE9K


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:40 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need design for helical wound 40 meter vertical
Date: 22 Oct 1995 21:01:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46epgq$[e-mail]>
References: <45pdq5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In a message dated 95-10-19 19:15:21 EDT, you write:

>---------------------------------------------
>You got my curiosity aroused.  Why would a helically loaded antenna be
>inherently less efficient than any other kind of loaded one?
>
>
>73, Bill W7LZP
>[e-mail]
>
>

Because the necessary inductive loading is distributed evenly between the
poorest locations as well as the best locations. The other reason is the
form factor of the inductance is very poor, so the losses for a given
amount of loading inductance are very much higher than those in a properly
designed "lumped" coil. I can't figure out why people seem to like them,
perhaps it's because the current distribution is tapered and "looks" like
a full size antenna? Maybe they think that means it works just as well?
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:41 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!newsmaster
From: Jorma Saloranta <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: NEED plans for small 10 meter antenna
Date: 23 Oct 1995 20:04:43 GMT
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <46gsgs$[e-mail]>
References: <464e25$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: salor.pp.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Make ZL-special, a two elements yagi, very close spaced.
Look for it at ARRL's Antenna Handbook.

The cheap model made of twinlead and fiberclass rods is
easy, works well...guaranteed.

OH2KI
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Phased Horizontal Loops <Q>?
Date: 27 Oct 1995 00:50:17 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46poe9$[e-mail]>
References: <46o7fs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Gary,
> My current project is a full wave horizontal loop on 160m.  The thought
> occurred to me that one might obtain some gain by phasing a pair of
them.

Well, probably only straight up! The basic problem is each loop has
maximum radiation straight up, so if you do things to put a null straight
up, you will likely loose gain. I would think your efforts would be better
spent installing a ground system under the loop.

>Is such a thing practical?  I DON'T have the ability to stack them
vertically.
> Is it possible (assuming single band operation) to put a pair of them
side
>by side and obtain gain?

Only in a direction that they don't have nulls.

>If so, what would the spacing be like?  What would happen, if anything,
to the cloud warmer pattern?  Would it be oblong?

You could play all day on Elnec with this. It would keep you busy! But any
gain would likely be small to nil. It's really the wrong basic cell to
start with, because it allready has nulls where you may not want them. You
could tilt the pattern back and forth a bit, but that would be about it!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Q:  Quarter v. Half v. Full wave Antenna?
Date: 24 Oct 1995 11:21:33 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <46ii7t$[e-mail]>
References: <46g6ht$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>Could someone direct me to a FAQ for this group (if there is one)?

>Alternatively, could someone please explain to me the difference in
>quarter,  half, and full wave antennas?

Why do you disregard the alternative of reading a book?
If you do not like paper, just scan it before reading ;-)

There are diagrams on the *radiation pattern* vs. length,
which answer your question.



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!server2.rz.uni-leipzig.de!news.uni-jena.de!prakinf2.PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Q:  Quarter v. Half v. Full wave Antenna?
Date: 25 Oct 1995 17:45:59 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <46lt4n$[e-mail]>
References: <46g6ht$[e-mail]> <46ii7t$[e-mail]> <46lf7r$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>>There are diagrams on the *radiation pattern* vs. length,
>>which answer your question.

Well,

to put radiation patterns in words, UHF (300 - 1000 MHz) antennas are
usually 1/2 wl long (1/4 wl with radials is similar). They radiate
basically in all diections apart from top and bottom of the
dipole. An antenna becomes seemingly large, when it is placed
on a long pole to get it clear of obstacles (radiowaves tend to
be obstructed by objects much larger than a wavelength).

Often the radiation pattern is enhanced (radiation directed into
a preferred direction) by combining several of these dipoles.
This can give the appearance of a *long* antenna (see: collinear)
or a rake (see: Yagi).

2 wl and more long antennas are only used on HF (3 - 30 MHz, see: long wire).

OK?




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!dsi.unimi.it!sirio.cineca.it!gopher
From: Andy IK4WMG <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Receiving Loop ?
Date: 22 Oct 1995 11:27:32 GMT
Organization: -
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <46d9r4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sercom.nettuno.it
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
To: [e-mail]
X-URL: news:[e-mail]

Well OM I build that antenna for 80 mt. with the following size:
1x1x1x1 mt with rg59 (75ohm).
I try with a variable capacity to find resonance but with a 100pF I get
no result. So I put in parallel config 4 100 pF variable capacitor and I
get a resonance with about 200pF.
I have to say that result are not as expected. Comparing with my
fullsize vertical (only 11 radials anyway) the noise diappear but the
signal too...! I found better receiving with the other fullsize vertical
for 40 mt.
Let me know your result, I am intrested in.
IK4WMG - Andy




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!news.tamu.edu!news.utdallas.edu!usenet
From: William Osborne <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ring and Side Mounted Rotators
Date: 25 Oct 1995 13:14:18 GMT
Organization: Engineering School
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <46ld7a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc12139.utdallas.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with Ring rotors or
side mounting of yagis.
Thanks
William Osborne, AA5ZQ
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:47 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!veltman
From: [e-mail] (paul Veltman)
Subject: Ringo cut chart
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 04:02:42 GMT
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]

Hey Gang,
I have a ringo ranger antenna that came with the house I bought.  The
manual didn't come with it :-(
Does anyone have a cut chart for this antenna that can give me the upper
and lower lengths and the stub length for 160 MHz?

Thanks,

Paul WA6OKQ


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:48 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.netropolis.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Robert M. Bratcher Jr.)
Subject: Re: Rombic antenna questions
Message-ID: <a167cb$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 19:10:17 GMT
Distribution: world
Reply-To: [e-mail]
References: <a117cb$[e-mail]> <467pi2$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 28
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:65175 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16668

Steve Whitt <[e-mail]> wrote:

>In article <462rvb$[e-mail]> W8JI  Tom, [e-mail]
>writes:
>>Rhombics, Vees and other longwire arrays (yes even Beverages) have the
>>poorest gain and directivity per unit space of almost any directional
>>antenna. They were the hot set-up long before curtain arrays and
>>log-periodics, but have fallen by the wayside now.
>>

>I don't think they've fallen by the wayside. Many commercial h.f point to
>point links still use rhombics on transmit and receive and they are used
>by professional monitoring stations.

>Gain isn't everything on receive. Usually what counts is signal to noise
>or signal to interference ratios and receive-only antennas such as
>Beverages can knock the socks off most other antenna designs in this
>respect. Yes they can't be rotated but then they are cheap!. Incidentally
>if I had 90 acres I'd build a an array of beverages like spokes on a
>wheel spaced every 30 degrees (12 beverages) (I can dream!!)

>G0ood luck
>Steve
Well it DOES pay to live in the country! I just like to use long
antennas. Building my first of 4 rhombics now. Don't think beverages
work too well on SW since I listen between 530khz & 30 mhz!





From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!bt!cage.zoo.bt.co.uk!whitt_s
From: Steve Whitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rombic antenna questions
Date: 25 Oct 1995 14:33:44 GMT
Organization: BT Labs, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, UK
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46lhs8$[e-mail]>
References: <a167cb$[e-mail]> <46ga0j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cage.zoo.bt.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Nuntius 2.0.1_PPC
X-XXMessage-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-XXDate: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 14:33:39 GMT
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:65279 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16731

In article <46eofr$[e-mail]> W8JI  Tom, [e-mail]
writes:
>On 160 meters, at my location here in Georgia and at my past Ohio
>location, four small in-line phased loops (210 ft total length array) are
>usually 3 to 6 dB better than a 500 ft Beverage for DX on very quiet
>nights, and sometimes as much as 20 to 30 dB better when thunderstorms are
>b

Very interesting to see comparison between phased loops and Beverages.
When you say 3-6dB better do you mean signal strength or signal-to-noise
ratio?

Intuitively (and maybe wrongly) I'd have expected a lower signal-to-noise
from a Beverage.

My own practical experience on MW with multiple beverages has found me
chasing signals into the receiver noise floor (noise figure = 10-12dB)
post local sunrise. All the reference material I've found indicates that
reception is limited by atmospheric noise (assuming a rural location and
minimal man-made noise).

I presume you use a phasing system that gives you a steerable beam with
your four loops? And I guess they are low impedance non-resonant designs?
 Are you using commercial loops or home made?

regards
Steve
Editor Medium Wave News


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:50 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!saluki-news.wham.siu.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Per Stomhagen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Satellite antenna?
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 21:26:17 GMT
Organization: Southern Illinois University - Carbondale
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <46m2uu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ee023.engr.siu.edu
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

Does anybody know anything about circular microstrip antennas?
Something like an overview of different brands would be nice or maybe
some names of companies that makes them?
All answeres and information are appriciated!

Thank you!

Per Stomhagen

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:51 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!spstimes.sps.mot.com!newsdist.sps.mot.com!newsgate.sps.mot.com!hofbrau.sps.mot.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Chris Terwilliger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Saturn 6 halo question
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 08:40:09 -0700
Organization: Motorola
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hofbrau.sps.mot.com

I recently aquired a Saturn 6 Halo and installed it on the roof of my
house.  The bandwidth seems a bit narrow (300 Khz) at SWR = 2.0 with SWR
rising rapidly beyond the edges.  Is this normal for this "mobile" antenna?

--
Chris Terwilliger, AA7WD
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Vic Klein)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Saturn 6 halo question
Date: 25 Oct 1995 14:10:26 GMT
Organization: Kleerdex Company
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <46lggi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shckppp45.epix.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.2

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chris Terwilliger) says:
>
>I recently aquired a Saturn 6 Halo and installed it on the roof of my
>house.  The bandwidth seems a bit narrow (300 Khz) at SWR = 2.0 with SWR
>rising rapidly beyond the edges.  Is this normal for this "mobile" antenna?
>
>--
>Chris Terwilliger, AA7WD
>[e-mail]

Wow! Hadn't heard of one antennas in decades! I used to mount them to
the rear bumper (that dates me as well, I guess) and operate 6m mobile
with a modified Heath "Sixer". Yup, to get omnidirectional horizontally
polarized radiation and a reasonable (then, at least) size what was
given up (as is always the case) was some bandwith. Are you using a
transformer feed or the spliced up cable matching section?

73 es CUL,     =Vic=  WA4THR


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 22 Oct 1995 21:01:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46eph8$[e-mail]>
References: <465msg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <465msg$[e-mail]>, Zack Lau <[e-mail]> writes:

>I suspect that the light weight of aluminum is a factor
>that outweighs its higher loss.  Little things add up
>when you wire up an entire town or city...
>
>
>Zack KH6CP/1

Hi Zack,

A tiny little connector is NOT an entire town or city.

Since the connector is so small, and I^2R losses in the shell so small,
WHO CARES??? If we can get away with fifty or a hundred feet of lossy
outer conductor, we can certainly get away with a fraction of an inch of
it in the connector! Such a fuss over nothing....

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 24 Oct 1995 23:35:58 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <46jt8u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

  I'm pretty sure the advantage of silver plating is reduced intermod.
I've seen the rough-surfaced silver connectors, though, and I think they
are a new wrinkle in the complex world of RF connectors.  Evidently they
are very cheaply produced and rough as a result; they probably don't
demonstrate the advantages of silver plating, only the advantages of
clever and unscrupulous marketing.  Forget them; I'm talking about
quality connectors.

  Back in the early 80's, I saw a video from GE on 800 MHz trunking.  GE
vigorously recommended silver plated connectors because of lower intermod.
The engineers on the video went so far as to state that the FCC had "set us
up" for intermod problems on 800 MHz trunking, with channel spacing
designed to cause problems if any intermod was present.  If so, it was a
clever way to make the industry self-regulating; a system producing
intermod would put itself off the air!

  If the fellow is correct, who posted that the intermod products are
120 dB down with nickel - well, -120 dB sounds like a lot, but that's a
lot of intermod in a duplex system.  Figure the numbers for a
multi-frequency system: even at 10 watts per channel, that's +40 dBm per
channel.  Now, if intermod is -120 dB from there, that's -80 dBm of
intermod.  -80 dBm is about 22 uV in a 50 ohm system, not an interference
level to disregard lightly!


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:55 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 25 Oct 1995 10:07:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 55
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46lgag$[e-mail]>
References: <CSLE87-1710950948330001@145.39.1.10>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Karl,
In article <CSLE87-1710950948330001@145.39.1.10>, [e-mail]
(Karl Beckman) writes:

>
>Whenever RF current flows through the nickel plating (due to skin
effects)
>it generates harmonics, like a lossy diode junction.  If you happen to be
>at a site where there are other medium to high power transmitters or
>antennas, such as your own HF rig, the RF fields can induce enough
current
>to generate harmonics in the plating on the connectors.  If you are
within
>a few miles of an AM or FM  broadcast station you can sometimes even hear
>harmonics generated by your connectors.  Operate novice CW on 80 and get
a
>"pink slip" for harmonics above the 40M band, just as with an improperly
>tuned tube rig of the old days.

Those mixing products are over a hundred dB down according to Zach
reference. I can't imagine this causing a problem unless you are duplexing
a few transmitters and a receiver all on one antenna. You may receive a
"pink slip" unwanted emissions are less than 40 dB (or so) down. A modern
exciter typically has spurs 50 or so dB down. Seriously now, who really
cares if the connector adds something -140dB or more down? Let's not alarm
people needlessly!

In order to produce excessive unwanted signals, the receiver would have to
be connected to the same antenna along with two or more transmitters. This
question was for a scanner antenna, not a military multi-TX and RX single
antenna application!

>Silver or other non-ferrous material should always be used for high power
>RF connectors unless you and your neighbors (physical, RF, and
regulatory)
>can tolerate the generation of harmonics on any frequency that passes
>through the connector at a decent power level.

I can't even imagine a problem with a nickle plated connector in an
amateur installation. Who really cares if it generates IMD products over
one hundred dB down? FCC type acceptance of 1500 watt amplifiers only
require spurious emission levels being approximately 45 dB down from the
1500 watt output level. Aren't we being a bit alarmist here, implying that
this will cause trouble with the neighbors?

>Silver solders much better

Good reason!

>silver has higher conductivity than nickel and therefore lower losses,

Who cares? The outer conductor loss in the connector is insignificant to
the entire system loss anyway!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!castle.nando.net!news
From: Dave Hockaday <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small lot antenna for 80-10m
Date: 25 Oct 1995 13:22:19 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <46ldmb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4634ch$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <463io7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1220.nando.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)


>>There's little doubt that a 40M dipole won't
>>present a suitable impedance on all the bands from 160 to 10M.
>
>Here's an idea for a 40m dipole on 20m. Feed it with an odd
>number of quarter-wavelengths of 450 ohm ladder-line. With
>any luck, the full-wave (high R) antenna impedance may be
>transformed to somewhere around 50 ohms at the transmitter.
>73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

I must agree with Cecil. I've built several shortened dipoles over the
years and found that feeding them with ladderline and a tuner works very
well. Ladderline has relatively low loss in high SWR conditions vs
coaxial cable's high loss in high SWR conditions. I've loaded 40 meterish
size dipoles on 80/75/160 with good results when fed with ladderline.
73 de WB4IUY



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:57 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: small xmt loop questions
Date: 25 Oct 1995 08:04:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 37
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46l93m$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Roger,

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Roger A. McCarty) writes:
>
>The pictorials show a fixed
>value capacitor constructed of double sided pc board material, in
parallel
>with a variable capacitor  of minimum plate spacing recommended in figure
17.
>
>The accompanying text makes no mention of this capacitor, nor is there a
>schematic that would assist in identifying the necessity, or not,  of
this
>cap. In addition, the Variable transmitting capacitor the text indicates
is
>available through W5QJR products, is NOT available any longer.
>
>I wonder of anyone out there has some practical experience with an
antenna of
>this sort that may shed some light for me.
>
I've built a few small loop antennas for transmitting. The current is very
high in the loop, and the voltage across the capacitor is very high. A
regular air variable may add significant losses to the system.

Try to use a compact split stator capacitor or a vacuum cap if you can,
and smooth wide connections to the capacitor. The resistance of the
bearings can cause problems, that's why a spit stator (with opposite loop
terminals connected to each stator) or vacuum cap works better. The
current flows only through solid mechanical connections as opposed to
sliding spring loaded connections.

I don't know the other details of the article, since I don't have that
Handbook.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 95 04:20:37 GMT
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4693b9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:

>Not really knowing what I was doing, I have always used type '2' red
>toroids for HF stuff simply because the Amidon brochure says it has a
>frequency range of 3-30MHz. I have been using T80-2 toroids for current
>pickups on my 300 ohm ladder-line but the output is pretty low (1v p-p)
>with 60t of #28. So I wound a new pickup on an FT82-61 which has a u=125
>vs the red#2 u=10. But I got approximately the same output from the 61
>core as from the #2 core. The two cores are about the same size with the
>same number of turns. What gives?

Cecil, the toroids only require sufficient permeability to achieve a
good coefficient of coupling.  Once that is accomplished, increased
permeability won't significantly affect the voltage from the pickup.
The voltage generated by the pickup is the result of the turns ratio,
so barring insufficient coupling or unwanted resonance, changing the
permeability shouldn't have any effect.

Funny you posted this; I was just abouit to ask for some of the details
on the pickups you built.  Any tips on the mechanical construction?  I
was thinking about building the two pickups coils, then sandwiching them
between two squares of 1/4" plexiglass.  They would be spaced the same
distance apart as my ladder line.

What do you think?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:25:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 95 14:07:10 GMT
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4693b9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>Cecil, the toroids only require sufficient permeability to achieve a
>good coefficient of coupling.

One other thing I forgot to mention.  The detector winding must follow
the same rule as other broadband transformers - the XL of the winding
should be four or five times the Z of the load.  If RG-58 is attached
to the output winding and terminated in a 50 ohm resistor, approximately
200 ohms winding XL is needed on the lowest frequency of operation.

With that in mind, ten turns yields:

            T-80-2      FT-82-61
    MHz    XL (ohms)    XL (ohms)
    1.8       30           83
    3.5       59          161
    7.0      117          322
   10.0      167
   14.0      234

The T-80-2 is probably passable as 10 MHz and should work well on bands
above that.  The FT-82-61 is passable on 3.5 MHz and meets the minimum
requirement on 40m and up.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:00 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 21 Oct 1995 20:22:25 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 23
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46bkq1$[e-mail]>
References: <4693b9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Funny you posted this; I was just abouit to ask for some of the details
>on the pickups you built.  Any tips on the mechanical construction?  I

Well, obviously I don't know much about how many turns to use. What I
have done so far is use a nylon nut wedged inside the toroid to center
the wire through it. A very small dab of silicone sealer keeps it rigid.
The two cores are suspended about an inch apart inside a plastic box.
I use Molex pins for the connections.

>was thinking about building the two pickups coils, then sandwiching them
>between two squares of 1/4" plexiglass.  They would be spaced the same
>distance apart as my ladder line.

I think W8JITom said that an electrostatic shield needs to go between
the coils to avoid capacitive coupling between the two coils. The
larger cores cannot be spaced the same as the 300 ohm ladder line.
Roy, W7EL, used a small separate bifilar wound toroid to eliminate
the common mode voltages from the measurements.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:01 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 21 Oct 1995 20:25:42 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 11
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46bl06$[e-mail]>
References: <4693b9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>   [e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
>The T-80-2 is probably passable as 10 MHz and should work well on bands
>above that.  The FT-82-61 is passable on 3.5 MHz and meets the minimum
>requirement on 40m and up.

Roy, W7EL, used an FT82-43 for his measurements.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 95 07:00:05 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 43
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46cqkm$[e-mail]>
References: <4693b9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <46bkq1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:

>What I have done so far is use a nylon nut wedged inside the toroid
>to center the wire through it. A very small dab of silicone sealer
>keeps it rigid.  The two cores are suspended about an inch apart
>inside a plastic box.  I use Molex pins for the connections.

That's close to what I was planning, except two pieces of coax would
be sandwiched between the two pieces of plexiglass along with the
toroids.  Two holes would be drilled through the plexiglass to pass
the balanced line, and the toroids and coax would be held in place
with silicone.  The through holes would be smaller than the ID of
the toroids, so that eliminates the need to insulate the inside
circumference of the cores.  Where the two ends of the coax extend out
of the sandwich, I would terminate each cable with a 50 ohm resistor,
and that's where the scope probes would attach.

>I think W8JITom said that an electrostatic shield needs to go between
>the coils to avoid capacitive coupling between the two coils.

Haven't heard of that.  Tom, if you're following this, what's a
good way to build a shield for this use?

>The larger cores cannot be spaced the same as the 300 ohm ladder
>line.

My line is spaced on 3/4" centers.  Rather than place an order for
only two toroids, I was planning to slide a couple of the FB-43-2401
beads off the balun I just built and try them.  They're each 0.38"
diam., so the pair could be slipped over the line and would leave
about 0.37" space between them.  With an AL somewhat above 500, I
think they should do the job.

>Roy, W7EL, used a small separate bifilar wound toroid to eliminate
>the common mode voltages from the measurements.

I've been wondering whether the pickups could be affected by this.
Do you have more details of the bifilar xfmrs?  Was this in a
published article?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:04 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!hookup!news.kei.com!simtel!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 23 Oct 1995 06:22:00 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 86
Message-ID: <46fca8$[e-mail]>
References: <4693b9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx08-18.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

Looks like it's circuit analysis time again. Here's a
simple current transformer:

       I1->      I2->
      ______   ______
            |  |     |
            |  C     <
     Zi ->  C  C     < Rl
            |  C     <
      ______|  |_____|

            1:N turns

When terminated with some sort of load Rl, it would be
used to determine what I1 is. Typically, we look at the
voltage Vl across Rl and calculate I2 = Vl/Rl, then assume
that I1 = N*I2 (which it would be if the transformer
were perfect). One measure of quality of the real
transformer is how close the ratio I1/I2 is to N. One
other characteristic is important. We don't want the
transformer to insert a high impedance in the branch being
measured -- otherwise it may change what we're trying to
measure. That is, we want Zi to be small. If the transformer
were perfect, Zi = Rl/N^2, and we choose Rl and N for a
tolerable combination of Zi and enough voltage across Rl
to measure. A second measure of quality is Zi for a given Rl
and N.

The equations end up being simple, as they often do:

(I've assumed a unity coefficient of coupling here, and will
show its effect shortly.)

I1 / I2 = (N * Rl) / (Rl || Z2)

where Z2 is the impedance of the secondary winding, and
Rl || Z2 is the parallel combination of Rl and Z2. I didn't
show Z2 in the model due to laziness -- it's just connected
across the secondary.

Zi = (Rl || Z2) / N^2

If the winding impedance Z2 >> Rl, the transformer will act
like the ideal one, with I1/I2 ~ N and Zi ~ Rl / N^2. A low
winding Z will actually decrease the insertion impedance Zi but
will degrade the accuracy of the current ratio.

This is important: It doesn't matter whether the impedance of
the winding is resistive or inductive or a combination (unless
enough power is involved to cause intolerable heating). The
only thing that's important is that the secondary Z (Z2) be
>> Rl. If you can't make the winding Z very high, there's no
reason you can't make Rl small as long as you can measure the
voltage across it. (Unless, of course, you make it so small that
the resistance of the winding becomes significant.) I generally
use 70-series ferrite for HF because I can get a lot of Z per
turn squared. It's resistive, but I don't care. Type 43 gives
less at HF (about half the Z of type 73 at 10 MHz, about 1/3 at
2 MHz) but is equal at 30 MHz and has more Z than type 73 above
30 MHz(*). Powdered-iron cores give much less impedance per turn
squared, so it's very difficult to get Z2 high enough to not
affect measurement accuracy. 60-series ferrites also have less Z
per turn squared than 70-series or type 43, so there's no good
reason to use them unless you have a heating problem due to high
power.

To see the effect of coefficient of coupling (k), substitute
kN for N (and (kN)^2 for N^2) in the above equations. A lowered
coefficient of coupling has the same effect as decreasing
the turns ratio(**). With ferrite cores it's not hard to get
coefficients of coupling very near 1. It's not so easy with low-
permeability powdered-iron cores, which is a second reason
they're not suitable for this job.

  (*) _Fair-Rite Soft Ferrites_, 12th Ed., Fair-Rite Corp.,
Fig. 9, p. 45.

  (**) I have to be a little careful here. I've assumed that the Z
of the secondary is N^2 times the impedance of the primary, which
is true only if the coefficient of coupling is one. If you need
to analyze cases with k much less than 1, you need a more complex
model.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 24 Oct 1995 16:53:01 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <46j5ld$[e-mail]>
References: <46ga2a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-57.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:

>. . .

>  It's important to remember we are looking to acheive errors of 1% or less
>  over the entire frequency BW of the detector in most cases, so what we
>  would consider "flat" in a coupling transformer or balun would be useless
>  here!

I'm sorry I missed the original post which apparently included this requirement.
Since a lot of detectors are good from MF to VHF, this puts a whole new light
on the problem. In that case, several second-order effects like capacitance
(as you mentioned) and winding resistance should be considered, as well as
coefficient of coupling and winding impedance. And if there's a requirement
to make measurements at high powers in addition, the problem is tougher yet.
I would think this problem would be outside the realm of typical amateur
construction, and would require some pretty fancy test equipment to verify.

By the way, what's the application which requires this kind of accuracy and
bandwidth? I assume it's a commercial one, so some professional design help
might be in order.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 24 Oct 1995 16:56:26 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <46j5rq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-57.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>     [e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
>  >Cecil, the toroids only require sufficient permeability to achieve a
>  >good coefficient of coupling.
>
>  One other thing I forgot to mention.  The detector winding must follow
>  the same rule as other broadband transformers - the XL of the winding
>  should be four or five times the Z of the load. . .

Tom said the requirement was 1% accuracy over a very wide bandwidth. This
would require more like a winding Z (R, X, or combination) of 100 times
the Z of the load unless the error is taken care of with calibration.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL






From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 95 17:28:44 GMT
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <46j5rq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:
>>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>>     [e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>>
>>  >Cecil, the toroids only require sufficient permeability to achieve a
>>  >good coefficient of coupling.
>>
>>  One other thing I forgot to mention.  The detector winding must follow
>>  the same rule as other broadband transformers - the XL of the winding
>>  should be four or five times the Z of the load. . .
>
>Tom said the requirement was 1% accuracy over a very wide bandwidth. This
>would require more like a winding Z (R, X, or combination) of 100 times
>the Z of the load unless the error is taken care of with calibration.

Yes, it sure would.  I'm hoping the application Tom has in mind is
something other than a pair of pickups that only require *relative*
accuracy.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:09 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 25 Oct 1995 08:03:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 54
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46l91p$[e-mail]>
References: <46j5ld$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <46j5ld$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

>
>By the way, what's the application which requires this kind of accuracy
and
>bandwidth? I assume it's a commercial one, so some professional design
help
>might be in order.
>
>73,
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Hi Roy,

Maintaining one percent or so accuracy in ONE arm of the bridge doesn't
seem to be an overly stringent requirement for Amateur radio from 160
through ten meters. The bridge balance ("reverse" null) must be maintained
so the directional coupler indicates accurate SWR readings. Unless you
really don't care if the SWR reading is flat with a perfect termination.
What others may be considering "flat" may not really be what I am calling
"flat". I have no idea what that term means to others. I do know that the
arbitrary "rules of thumb" for building baluns are much too slack for
direction coupler transformers.

A scope may not show flaws when testing the transformer for voltage VS.
frequency flatness for a number of reasons. One reason that stands out in
my mind is the possible lack of voltage resolution on the screen.

Sixty turns is a lot of wire, and a multi-megohm scope input is pretty
high load Z for the detector. I know stray capacitance from the wire
passing through the current transformer to the winding is a problem at
frequencies as low as 20 MHz. I would expect the denser winding to create
even more stray capacitance problems than just the internal secondary
winding turn-to-turn capacitance, since it also increases the secondary to
primary capacitance. Not including an electric (as opposed to
electrostatic) field shield also causes problems if the primary wire is
not positioned to minimize unwanted capacitive coupling in the core
window.

I don't know that the transformer can be designed with cookbook formulas,
because of all the subtle problems caused by strays in the circuit. Even a
carelessly created ground loop or poor mounting location choice can
destroy an otherwise good directional coupler. That's another problem with
hanging a big scope on the RF output of the current transformer (and with
phase and voltage measurements made earlier on baluns)! The real way to do
ythis would be to take the voltage to dc with a detector, and then
decouple the dc leads with series impedances, and use a meter.

I don't think this is outside the realm of Amateur capabilities in
equipment or skill (especially with bulldog tenacity like Cecil's, hi), it
just requires care in layout and how measurements are made.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:10 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 25 Oct 1995 15:50:51 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 24
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46lmcr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <46j5rq$[e-mail]> <46jq70$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) wrote:
>
>>   (+) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\     /<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<|
>>                           \   /                           |
>>                    |-----------------|                    /
>>                    |    :       :    |     ladder-line    \
>>   transmitter      |    :       :    |                    / antenna
>>                    |-----------------|                    \
>>                           /   \                           |
>>   (-) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<</     \>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>|
>>
>
>Maybe I'm interpreting the drawing incorrectly, but it appears that both
>sides of the line pass through the toroid. (?)  If so, common currents
>would be the only thing it will measure, because the flux induced by
>differential currents will cancel.

Hi Jack, see above for vector direction of current flow. The differential
currents are flowing through the toroid causing the fluxes to add. The
common mode fluxes would subtract from each other.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 26 Oct 1995 17:11:41 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 24
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <46ofgd$[e-mail]>
References: <46jq70$[e-mail]> <46mu3v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com

In article <46mu3v$[e-mail]>,
Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:

>;
>;    (+)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<(-)
>;     |                      \     /                       |
>;     |                       \   /                        |
>;     |                |-----------------|              Antenna
>;   XMTR               |    :       :    |                 |
>;     |       ladder-  |    :       :    |  ladder-        |
>;     |       line     |-----------------|  line           |
>;     |                       /   \                        |
>;    (-)<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<</     \>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(+)
>;

>Yes, it will work, and will measure ONLY common-mode currents. This is
>a good way to assess the line's balance.

Maybe my diagram wasn't clear. I've redone it with the current paths
marked. Looks to me like the differential currents are adding and
the common-mode currents cancel.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:12 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Toroidal Pickups
Date: 26 Oct 1995 17:31:18 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <46ogl6$[e-mail]>
References: <46gelg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx14-22.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:
;  In article <46cqkm$[e-mail]>,
;  WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
;
;  >I've been wondering whether the pickups could be affected by this.
;  >Do you have more details of the bifilar xfmrs?  Was this in a
;  >published article?
;
;  Roy, W7EL, did all this stuff long ago and published it in the first
;  ARRL Antenna Compendium. He put 5 bifilar turns on a small low-u core.
;
;  73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

I've learned since I published that. I now recommend high-u cores (type
70-series ferrite) for HF unless enough power is involved to generate
intolerable heating.

You can also find an example in Chapter 8 of the ARRL Antenna Book, 15th
Edition or later, in the section "Practical Aspects of Phased Array Design".

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:13 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!primenet.primenet.com!markem
From: [e-mail] (Mark Monninger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Travelling Wave Ant. in QST
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 18:54:42 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 5
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip117.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

Anybody have any thougts on the travelling wave design in the Nov QST? Looks
interesting and might fit my needs. I have most of the bits to put it together
so I might give it a try. All I need is the elusive round tuit.

73...  Mark   AA7TA


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:14 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hplextra!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!rkarlqu
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: U.S. Tower
Date: 24 Oct 1995 17:24:22 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <46j7g6$[e-mail]>
References: <4664mo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpscrj.scd.hp.com

In article <4664mo$[e-mail]>,
Christopher Scibelli <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Does anyone have any comments on U.S. Tower's products?  I'm
>considering the MA-550 tubular tower with the rotating base and
>raising fixture.
>
>Chris
>NU1O
>
>----------------------
>[e-mail]
>[e-mail]

I've had one for about 10 years.  It's a very light duty tower
that's probably worth the $995 selling price.  The base accesories
are rather pricey and instead of being galvanized are merely
painted and mine show signs of rust.  The quality of the components
is OK but not great.  They get the job done.  Mine was cranked up
during the 1989 7.1 earthquake in Silicon Valley and did not get
damaged, which says something for it.  On the other hand, you cannot
leave it cranked up in a storm with anything but a *small* tribander,
if you want to be sure of it surviving.  It is definitely not in the
"Skyneedle" class, but then the skyneedle is much heavier and much
more expensive.  One nice thing is that US Tower will provide
UBC calcs to use to get your building permit.

If I had to do it over, I'd probably go with a conventional tower or
spring for a Skyneedle.  I did try to buy a used Skyneedle at the
time but another ham ended up getting it first.

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:15 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!pineapp
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Curry)
Subject: Unknown Mobile Antenna, Need Help??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom-Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 15:06:17 GMT
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail]

 I have a mobile antenna that I had purchased at a flea Market.

 The antenna has an electric motor at the base that controls the tuning
capacitor. I do know that it is NOT a DK-3 antenna.

 From the base of the antenna it has a short mounting post that is
attached to a ball mount. From there is has a small box that
houses a small motor. This motor controls a string pulley combination,
About three feet up there is a tuning capacitor. This tuning capacitor measure
about 12 inches. It is house in a plastic case. From the tuning capacitor
there is a 5 feet rod.

  I do hope that I had described it correctly. And if someone
can help me to identify it I would very much appreciated it.
  Also if someone has any instruction sheet. I would like to
get hold of a copy.
 It looks like it was something from the 50's. but don't know.



--
.----------------------------------------------+--------------------------.
| INTERNET: [e-mail]     (DC436)     | Daniel Curry             |
| AMPRNET : [e-mail]  [44.4.20.144] | WB6STW                   |
| AX.25   : wb6stw@n0ary.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA      | DoD # 1450               |
'----------------------------------------------+--------------------------'


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dfw.net!news.dfw.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Brian Oakley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Velocity Factor rg8x
Date: 21 Oct 1995 19:34:02 -0500
Organization: DFWNet -- Public Internet Access
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <46c3hq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.175.15.10
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Someone posted they needed the velocity factor for RG8X-95. Im not sure
but I have a catalog that lists Beldens RG8-X vf as 78%. Brian



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:17 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: Velocity Factor rg8x
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 18:08:45 GMT
References: <46lo20$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 19

Roy Lewallen ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I've found that foamed-dielectric cable velocity factor varies a lot.
: I assume it's because they don't have all that good control over the
: foam density. If the velocity factor is important to your project, you
: probably should measure it.

I assume they control the diameters of the inner and outer conductors
pretty well.  This leads to the conclusion that the cable impedance
varies.  I hope this is not generally the case for a given roll of coax,
because if the impedance varies by much along the length of the line, it
can cause the line to act as a filter.  But even if it's safe to
assume that the dielectric of a reel of line is reasonably constant,
a direct correlary of Roy's comment would be, "If the impedance is
important to your project, you probably should measure it."  (And I do
agree you should measure the velocity factor if it's important to you.)

73, K7ITM



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:18 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!news99.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!eua.ericsson.se!news.algonet.se!news.uoregon.edu!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Dedelvis04)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WANTED: Ham Radio Antenna Software
Date: 26 Oct 1995 19:51:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46p6t8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dedelvis04)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I am looking for any software related to antenna design. Please E mail me.


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:19 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!world!news.mtholyoke.edu!news.umass.edu!nic.umass.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Will this work!?  A 2M antenna ?
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 03:47:25 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <469g22$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: titan.oit.umass.edu
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

OK...I kinda' came up with this and use the idea from an article.
Would this work?:
 ---   \
{| |}    \
{| |}      \ PVC Cap
{| |}                                               { or } = PVC Pipe
{| |}                                             | = Metal Tubing
{| |}                                             : = Copper Ground Pipe
{| |}    11'10.5"                              = = Coax Cable
{| |}
{| |}
{| |}
{| |}
[   ] ===========               PVC is 1".  Tubing is 1".  Copper pipe is 8
feet.
 : : \
 : :   \  _____________________
 : :     \|                                        |
 : :       |                {| |}                  |
 : :       |                {| |}                  |
 : :       |              ----                     |
 : :       | PVC      | =|=======       |
 : :       |  Joiner   ----                     |
           |              : :                      |
           ----------------------------------------
Does anyone have any simpler, better plans?  :)
                                73s....
                                KB0MMU



From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:20 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!van-bc!news.rmii.com!nexus.interealm.com!root
From: "George J. Molnar" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Will this work!?  A 2M antenna ?
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 08:05:58 -0600
Organization: ICG/MagNET [phone]
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <469g22$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp204.interealm.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b1J (Windows; I; 32bit)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> OK...I kinda' came up with this and use the idea from an
article.
> Would this work?:
>  ---   \
> {| |}    \
> {| |}      \ PVC Cap
> {| |}                                               { or } =
PVC Pipe
> {| |}                                             | = Metal
Tubing
> {| |}                                             : = Copper
Ground Pipe
> {| |}    11'10.5"                              = = Coax Cable
> {| |}
> {| |}
> {| |}
> {| |}
> [   ] ===========               PVC is 1".  Tubing is 1".
Copper pipe is 8
> feet.
>  : : \
>  : :   \  _____________________
>  : :     \|                                        |
>  : :       |                {| |}                  |
>  : :       |                {| |}                  |
>  : :       |              ----                     |
>  : :       | PVC      | =|=======       |
>  : :       |  Joiner   ----                     |
>            |              : :                      |
>            ----------------------------------------
> Does anyone have any simpler, better plans?  :)
>                                 73s....
>                                 KB0MMU

Maybe it would be better if you explained what you wanted to do.
Any hunk of conductor will radiate (thus "will work"), but I
suspect you want optimum performance for a specific application.

73


--
George J. Molnar
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Internet: [e-mail]
Packet: KF2T@N0QCU.#NECO.CO.USA.NOAM
http://nexus.interealm.com/p/gmolnar/index.html


From [e-mail] Fri Oct 27 12:26:21 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!noc.near.net!news.umass.edu!nic.umass.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Will this work!?  A 2M antenna ?
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 23:15:47 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <46oqco$[e-mail]>
References: <469g22$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: titan.oit.umass.edu
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

"George J. Molnar" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Maybe it would be better if you explained what you wanted to do.
>Any hunk of conductor will radiate (thus "will work"), but I
>suspect you want optimum performance for a specific application.

>73


>--
>George J. Molnar
>Highlands Ranch, Colorado
>Internet: [e-mail]
>Packet: KF2T@N0QCU.#NECO.CO.USA.NOAM
>http://nexus.interealm.com/p/gmolnar/index.html

Hehe...OK :)   Well...it would be used with my 2M handheld.  The
reason I would like to build a 2M antenna is because all I have is the
antenna that came with the HT and a mag mount.  I have tried both with
my fairly new TNC and I can't get any BBSes.  So, mainly I would be
using this for packet, I guess.  Thanks...KB0MMU.
                                   |||
                                  (@ @)
                               ooO~(_)~Ooo
        **************************************************************
        *                           Andy                             *
        *       Sysop of the Stargazer BBS       [phone]      *
        *       Email: [e-mail]                       *
        *       WWW Page: http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~muldowne    *
        **************************************************************



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:27 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!mhv.net!news.westnet.com!news-out.internetmci.com!internetMCI!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!DIALix!melbourne.DIALix.oz.au!sydney.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Robin Gandevia)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Counterpoise vs. radials
Date: 28 Oct 1995 00:08:07 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Sydney, Australia.
Lines: 57
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <46qp47$92i$[e-mail]>
References: <46jgms$[e-mail]> <46lgaf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <46jgms$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
: writes:
:
: >
: >Would a counterpoise for a multiband vertical (such as my Butternut
: >HF6V) be worth getting instead of using tuned radial wires?  When I
: >put the vertical on the roof of this rental twinplex I would like
: >to keep all my antenna paraphenalia on my side of the house, and
: >as low profile as possible.  The multiband dipole I strung across
: >the roof is giving the neighbors front-end overload, and the
: >ground-mounted vertical did likewise.  I'm hoping to consolidate
: >my antenna options and just use one multiband vertical, with one
: >of those strange-looking X-within-a-square counterpoises, on our
: >side of the house.  Maybe then I can run 5, 50 or 500 watts with
: >impunity, given that the doughnut of RF energy will take off well
: >above the roof.  --Bill KB8USZ [e-mail]
:
: Hi Bill,
:
: Remember the current divides between the radials, and radiation is a
: function of the current.
:
: So if you had one radial per band, the field from the radial would equal
: the field from the antenna's main element.
:
: Since the neighbor's equipment is all within the near field of the system,
: the best approach would be to use a lot of radials. Then the current and
: near field radiation from each radial is minimized.
:
: 73 Tom
:
:

Dear all,

I am most interested in this subject concerning the counterpoise
versus the normal wire radials - indeed for the Butternut antenna.

Forgive me if I have missed earlier correspondence, but I would be
most grateful for comments as to which system actually performs the
better.

My situation is for the antenna to be mounted about 10' above a tin
roof. I believe using the tin roof may cause additional TVI due to
electrical bonding between the sheets. The counterpoise answer seems
ideal - but my question is does it work as well as a reasonable radil
system? Running 3-4 radials for 6-8 bands would present some problems
but I' prefer to do this if it was considered better than the counterpoise.
I have not seen the Butternut counterpoise, but its dimensions seem
relative considerable.

Grateful for your time,

Robin Gandevia VK2VN
Ham Log 3.1



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.scott.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!decwrl!genmagic!sgigate.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!brutus.bright.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!ftpbox!mothost!lmpsbbs!dd381.comm.mot.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Bob Fairbairn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Advice on good mobile antenna for IC-706 HF rig wanted.
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 13:32:04 -0500
Organization: Motorola, LMPS
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dd381.comm.mot.com
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0

In article <[e-mail]>, Bill Harwood
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> 1.  Keep the radiated RF toward the rear of the vehicle and it will be
> better for you and the crs computers.  I have run 100 watts in a Ford
> Ranger for several years without incident.
>
> 2.  The best performing antennas are the screwdriver types from several
> vendors.  They are a hassel to tune while you drive.  This is a
> personnal choice.
>
> I use a SPIDER antenna made by a guy near Passadena Ca. It is a
> multiband top loaded antenna and works significantly better than Hustler
> types or whips.
> Good Luck,
> HF MOBILE IS A CHALLANGE but FUN!!!!!
>
> BILL HARWOOD
> AB6DY

A couple of more notes.  I have run just about any antenna you can name on
a car.  The best one I have seen for single band operation is the
Bug-Catcher.  The coil is high and it puts the signal in the air.

Height is might and it reduces some losses.  My current antenna is mounted
too low and it shows a bit.  The screwdriver antennas have great
performance and are a bit of a pain to tune, but the put out real signal.
In my case three S units better!

As far as computers in cars, be real carefull some cars now have computers
mounted in the back of the rear seat!.  I think it is the newer Fords!

Make sure you bond everything together.  Hood Trunk Body Chassis Exhaust
system.  Turn the AM radio off as you will probably get into it big time.

HF mobile is FUN and a challenge.

73 KF9OA

--
Bob Fairbairn
[e-mail]
Standard disclaimers apply here.


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:29 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gate.net!miafl2-7.gate.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Ted Andros)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Subscribe
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 18:24:18 -0500
Organization: Speakeasy Communications, Inc.
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: miafl2-7.gate.net
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b22.0+

How do I subscribe?  Ted Andros. W0URN.  Miami.  [e-mail].

--
TED ANDROS


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:41 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!wa2ise
From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: MS-DOS program for calculating J-pole antenna measurements
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 00:55:18 GMT
Lines: 390
Sender: [e-mail]

This program JPOLE.EXE calculates the lengths of the elements of a twinlead
Jpole antenna.  Uses regular (not foam) TV 300 ohm twinlead, also be
sure to use a choke coil or ferrite bead on the coax at the feedpoint
(creates a 1:1 balun).

Program runs on MSDOS PC's.
====================== NETRUN V2.3D DOS PROGRAM ========================

 THE FOLLOWING text is an executable NETRUN program. It does NOT require
 decoding. Please follow these simple steps:
Don't worry about that this posting having the MSB stripped off, the below
is designed to survive passing thru 7 bit systems (e-mail and netnews
strips off the MSB, thus they are 7 bit systems).  So, I guess this
post is not a "binary".  :-)

  1  Use a DOS TEXT EDITOR to clip the line below and end of text
  2  Save the clipped portion as JPOLE.EXE
  3  The program will execute when you enter JPOLE
     To extract the original program enter: JPOLE -DECODE

.............. Remove this line and everything above it ................
COM-PRG.COM=
%00%@@PZ-rm-rm-L#P_R^N15RX-qn-qnP-@!PY-!p-!`-!0P]=
X-b!P_WR^!5GG!5GG!5GG!5GG!5_RX-`K5pPP^15GG15GG15GG15GG-~!5Z#P^15Q_t#u!
JPOLE.EXE++++NETRUN_V2.3D_CODE_RX3FcEE<Zt+=
t"-AA000410EJRTR^!5P^15Gu'MTBMTB5C??BJtKM
MPOAHAHFNIOHDGALMDJLAOOCCPOKFHJDLIHPPFHFMKMDBCEHFDMCCCCHHPMDAEDHDPKIAOMK
MCCCANMNANANANMNANANKKMKMCCCANMNANANANMNANANKKMKMCCCANMNANANANMNANANKKLO
LMILPPMENMBCHFOLJDCAJLACAADPEKPFPPHOLIPMOFLCOMBEBNJOPLAABADPFKILAABAAFDD
[e-mail]_00004AD0<
,\+""^4"F+53F76735+-"+++&"46E553+-38$3"8"7""D-331253,3J-."JL3"E%&M"E3%N"
&E%O/"DYTN#V1\2OK4U*Q>"\:'"QT9"QL*"PU#"^+K?&GS##<""Q]&"QK#"PR%"^6K_#\#"a
P?"\"@"\+2"\-'"\M3";2@?>0::?X<=;2*"Q+#"\+%"\=+"P+#"PK"1U`*>"(\="GQ#""\`"
B\)"**;@0<>?)>-*I5?;?>?>D<?;U1*8H@=9"*"O:"U'"%*14@?(F1=?3^\[R"\PR"\\:"::
)=>?$;;""P"5,U*\BV"\$*"BC1*"<"?(%Qa".P^KULP\>"LQVZ"QZ""DO%""E.R\7^aP[#".
$TO1<U*>04DX3PZ"YD%"$"O2,U*I26O1\U*NIa>+G_##0"a?="\0B"8I_>'0\R?&5PL"GP#"
RP"4<U*%E)O5<U*D6XP#D"O2<U*D%RO5,U*\$-"\D9";W>>=;>%$R"Na)\\\%("\E4";2@?>
0::?$;;*6"Q#T"\&""\-""N"%\U\2."54376(75*."RM#$R?'`DVFO"U`*\^%R"""B""""9"
"""=""""+N%OK"U*GN$UP*RD@[C92"O"_D'2&CV?J#U*M\_D@[C9."RF"FFF"FFF(58^*"+"
2"""V">$Aaa/S#""""""""""""""2"?@ER"\4""(Y\5R2"78?L2QQS#"4+"3S#T*4""I13*"
/I3U$"""F+#R6;?)4X[8[MIE9=I<U3<OQ290)"1"2*"$""O2)P""5D5$%D7$I"WUT*PaJ5U*
Y\\BR]&BR[ZD2]6Q\#""K/""&EVE.X"3>%.R0?UaWER.QaP*>&.VIDRPB$"V>Z>"A.RZ>`La
;S?]6EX6+7"7*("7*'"7.)D7/-D5/%a?"&SA+'S?+&a\D2"8T4?*<6BSB"BB%S"BJEXB$\"$
+EXELRB\2"$E,RP"22\)^"\XAaZ91)P0Aa"Y%07.(?^S6A(+<BA"ER"?1[a=[(M.?RL.9aDY
@VZD'^DV_/.'?.aD[YVZ7D^DVW/.)'ZZ1R#7H458B*74T5*>\:@>2-**+2:;2*>>A=;>,:=*
+;<=<;**(%$"""""""""""""""""""&K@5L5*Q<`FR;LVQ%06CE?",V(W,$.IX]K_20?Z-NJ
:],[TNGQ>QS8ZE91_$OL:/PN03+F^931[#X:BK)JQQI,JD4L(NO?>4_aB]%FEX1+[.$3W65A
8G`-20_KCN=6E#H@_(OP1I\$7IRD+/3=$S`3WXR9'a#J)#3)?4E"Q;Z]Da/]">IS$:LN^)$=
KT<)%(Y:)[M"U4"&-EUHU#)\MLC)=SJ:->([C&)HW>`ZK`]$[P;=5-aMN+'[A_HOND;`2\:6
1,CYKXF(6N+Y*&M6@96T11YMGU7A#<=XT'AFI_R-8;'8T#+5[O4\>`P);,,S<RY^$"N%B(>V
,J"Z[\(CT).6<W9`'UU#?JFUOY>6@IH&ASR4=X*&?B@:L2R<:C3^?BP7SWA^RBU*[,&R]O_(
<5T[LC`MT<'/W@#HAK$I3I1Z/<208Z1`XWS6YX=AR&-0.WLV(5<G"GLQ[OS;J"4F@.-7Z&WY
X^,/9$7'2?K%8MMRZJ3O"Z5\(Y7"A]$X1P^7F=%?68(X9&R:$A^"]AF[F2&;E]TSR`FAL#^_
A&D+@:^:+N"DC[>HW&;"1&ZZHJ/([8R[.`@444X;=C0-;Da,/?aXZ]:$G^%F8?H=O^6K.GI.
T(I0IJ90\6QZ34SW)_9[6%U5%T/`(9JOJPIG2NA%KV'BK5P5Ea*V[/%>I2_"0?@>)Y%^I.AL
A&<O+3_=%_.>5):&#[[OVST28Z%E&_4H@RZ@PIIQW8KCGAVM:X,HVJ"7_'N&9M[_T>A4(?UB
;X5La)EM7a)^VHN06%WSZ0%)1S;5\XK,NKRJ.Y/`V*U_]DJ,_1TW[M2PG4KG3Z"2+4"HJREZ
R7?.<SO6Z7Y-*2?Y0(-BPQ6(5,A+#H0PRB=0*D.Y_2#:\-.0X]X+<0H<M`<("FT)D3'.R_GT
1J7S2D?I,H1Y1E>%XXWP@OO0$/B&2^-%SCJY"M6,L)*34\,=W6Sa*X`9aa?ATH&*]5H4WSO6
R1Q)2I7``U.YH-(;H7.?\U)+WH%301P0RDP[DW@J8)[VBF\3Y$FON%4EK/6T#Z?01;1W\>=`
25,Q2..aXGVVHYA=O\V#^0?/66N,F%X7*[*9&=WAYMLLU>Z-R%%N2[4MN,B'BTG-)\LO'GP)
F4DIR-$`09U"S9WADMMVN9a>]/&.%B\#WFWT4S09-7HMN(_\a(+/MT7P'C)UZY=MX2=H%>'&
2XT8._"%<3B_/5LT:.^@AO>[UT2BJIY1T+6>K"C#]>]<F(CU[*,@`),47#2[1/XNSRN_E$1P
NK?0TA1`20Ba\I@)QRNAV>/S:%&&LA),*0H&DSRUaA<`Q04,PaLA#KH"VB11',[N1UHBGPHE
I0(#9WI/MCLAXI>6][,/W>O<5*C.$1_G>98XCL?=$=*@OB[G]WA>4EJ[BD0L?C926+80O#G9
D:M@S\6?8N-"UI7+%\AS.a(-<IH@E`T#LSTS0aGQ71(`TK^I*>/2E)K-/ED-[>WS,52(7%7-
\)OATYJ((DO3P&P2"Q0&[S-=T4RFCZ5)8K/&[X.W93B(P_1BDW-P7C@1`:-;K8C`:J78Z,=*
Ca4B>91$',6EJQSa$\)B(">\`C"HBIZVI$W+-S#Y1G4:Y0Y_V[ZS&K?P`WGVG,N"WOR2(G,]
'Z+)0H'#VG@47ULB-Q`(_HB,T71C\TU/T)`P'(K$B990E'"'UP'JT2:4X$8,?&ZPS1DOBY4Y
V9\Q0[%0$"3'5YI"^\@4>DW/UW=#,\S^##7=33[05?Y#W9J#%]KGT&:^/.-B\TJT]OI-(GM>
[GS9JL#N&8-RL/&H6aEM<]C&;(E8&@3[H_:[8O]L'G*MH?@MGJR@J$I@GT;W?=&`V5aN'-KJ
M^8&Fa5R["KX.G<,2,@)(Z',*KW"$@#a3`"*:V1H41]%:BX%2JDG#/"7GX<67HY89P?/VX8E
?D<F.)ATB8BE_FSUE\'("_<&U63R:\B56X[2;:?X4OB..,Z6&+&>$,KF<aY(15%)S&/7-`66
^+a_U5LJ\E\(09[,>;/P#I%1P`N#4S_PA,Z?#T796F99=[\?1>X-P;X]?;Q'$9(ZE&2Y2:UT
/X"9;,2_"?HGIZ3>X`FC-I#a;BX^U8_BN+/XO.75P443JJ?BX;-CA#9N")?*^T32F-9]6SG1
@DHUU;6;8Y0456*KJ/R,1J6"VYQ7B&+)>]#8M2]WG1L6=DaFA=QY2.-aR3P&?KY9NC`@R`TW
RF\ICM;/TIT=)-K)%C^.EIT_;1;)H/BMHRWC+SJG+V>=85*5>,L.PG6S2W2?&J_S,=aBIGQ<
@+MN4R;F/)<KT6RI'&YK_%BaV?]CEN=9\]C\Z18B/T8`;6V(X*O`0N+9L>AE=Z&H7AK7GT$8
_^]K*FINGB"QP9\M%;`2T\:MQ1#JB>.:\&16?a"U7&5L.2<EBE4V5$D19M>Y98*GBAT;_L;T
FUA,A7K`GM:=9PHN02N1GET_9a]F+((^LPaU<TYK2F?SZ%D>L/<662@-A.L(-2#O4`]'*X)T
B8YHP8=SF:R@a_WF,T\%@X>=50)H"7L)@VM0?;2T#]WLBSXYQaD2+>8X1#R\KSFLMWEN(9L$
.S&"5/>R$=Q-QA7T$ZDA9]36?;#2H=QF`S(/.&a.,&TU(WJFT<[)"X>N3<GO5)T'$$-I;/50
NE[SFKXZ5E,/.H\R^a-&1:>\WR$L<`UT^"2V.,ZLM/`3US6+R(L7D=R8=&NQCYH<'8C*O:HA
*2X&&C*O7GZD6JGL3*#&"\QHLUT?HS5H,O_.OM;9PH#,1*L^_6@T3O8DPP&C=O?M@D8GR<>(
H0A+S`;<&3U'*%CA3)30F_XR..aa/"G+>32/?$aV=1XOG014Q_<N9NMB4RV%"P8R3a@/'],_
XIDR<X4GP[M]KT#VNB@].'7;\KM0@7%@D:><IXVR,W6<.YKU-R_6O784NQ^/_:6IT=++.#MI
<<.`=50-YB84.L'$^5VR(*STNBX@OXPJ_#RaH<VLHQ]aP2R%W8(P_*A8A;?DJ-%&E;R,BD>C
<L@#J+Q5\[,&^35G^(]G12:5O3@L]B$=Q\FFK^?7X"SY:<L;^TA$4&/#ZYPOACC0\*@DB*R6
\/XG\8RFN2M<S_/#+X^;YY[U.C:^?R5J$XJ0%BB[1MP2B*J055"7&BFL_T[EG#0+F(D#`^H,
XFY/Z[N9-(==;HT-/"U%K@,S`8UUSI8#OW@IS6[QGBENG,`2.XX"C+&A``MKUPDP%82L9ZQ+
JY_1X7>(SU7MZaQ7U+?]'KZUS'>MY.EFKN+CN8H>D8?;0[5?XH.-FL$4WI')_;EUZQY-5-I_
'.K'B>1S^CMV#A+#(NJQO`5YA?;'4J3`M8_52RVZ%N;0FHSP+GWT:@.F*L)?*;U\T6XWY(S4
J:?%<1_J[<<$'U@/E@3&R*@\.1\a.ZA\2I_MZKS/4?+#-R`-&aS1EI*C$.B:RF(M4YQVG5R-
3US:_9Z9D^)$1]T8*a:>BDR7T&SG`?VaI"7&-0JG##N^L)0@;[,2VDV\[-L^G&O$-(7)8"I?
1Q=9\Ja>K%>9VXF&%%QC91QCFGW&X\2\AHU=4$Z=#$1>SUJ22G.9^_ZA:F2JSI_Q'/^*C3\]
PD0A._L='6#[WV*@4(K3=+:ZK']?=@JBM)aQ\aJ(;S1[,(7]'/O>85?#9YIR,ZZ((=_61^C[
`/0^9U%6A4QA%S+"OJ7`$*49KLJXQ5_4_2?==9G*W$$ACV^-Q@OS,%AHD8IC'BY$'2]F,a>&
<66:KaEMBF(%3BZ+;=1Y;)&=SD;W%Z6A#*aR`T86.S1T\A"KHLKN_+W_5XZA;0*+G7M&T*W^
8XV*1.?@*0+DTM\\&US7J?\"#Q+.&'O+BV$(E*=?7G^>:FOO-D%TR<LM.U)R3YQN$Y3KTYCC
1"<.KJ6(*0U1(]\>/9C.S/",>*CR;7VZ5^MLUU\)E[EUG7H#")L$PF8;/Z(,V^ER%8AYC&L0
2F[;6YRA`R9'0^\Z@2QTZ8;a&P:K7/IMU,;026RDA;?ZB&-AI\2-1W9<#]7'88=I7)N(6KHQ
K8+LMJN9&^*K)YQMCOLE+?aa^7.N0+a3MC>P#HZJ;[EGSE0YW1%[:CIH)8IE+"A"-^U*6-KW
,A).S3F=Z&##O\J:WU(2X=_(,-\ZU:TAE%LUR=<494AJ<Q&XULNF4JXP&5'V@UPIQL&J'_5P
AI&VNZT<9R(YB^&.)5#W#+.>5GJNI.;N*&,,;A]FO[W"[9C;_B3L5,?[W,'^)a\`T<_A"]R4
FPP$+RVG:JKNK><2Z`-AT9':-*6REHW<D&1KFLN4Q5_;#,a_W*G9TZ*\0Q_IR?,[..>A`;1H
["2*+OVI>/++%))8JM?AO4T)8;Q_#=0%Q-\6P^5QLUW9]L99^O'\+)XM=>VRA,5[>CUKa"^6
;P"&P^1N>JYB?1)0'`H<+*Ha##&=(8$=L"BZ;YY%RTU%YX&D%,V\*GCZ\Q[V?/F']A%ZW<9R
JPJ7Ja6QZ9-.+60R8=BF7ES]&%A-MR\8]W`(YF0(1M8>+#Y/M-SD?Z5:/RIX+M"<\J9%'KOA
&-"H'SZ6W3%1O,HP=^K;C8A=UC+*I91N(,"@CB,N?HI15X@F3FE;FI8R1Ya:@,C).O).#V)<
U]@_]>AH9(_?Y(6T^6*9&A3K[O`P8<&4G#4-'O]PKRa=/;2QR8IQV;QKC,T'>6#9D#J8$%.N
[O.CE+-80@K?482H0-FQE3V^'/;H[%N56@/D#FUXQM$7IKYRH*@^BB%-L)_5,U'']<YYS?:?
9MMJ@YNI^YU3)'(^S'JNR%^S%YF14&B'6'PMOB3V=2F#O\YL+RA29?K%63U+E_ZQ;MVL)#_G
^*+S'+3C4Q83ZR;?F@?G"JJ=U#JMO(I.F;1^Y=PJ3A[X;@3Y"K4)S5D$V]8Y'_>*=;NJ*&]J
SK4QT(S9B"JK^%M&'TQVEL8\@W*G:UDP*>0(54OO*:3B'XS6\$;6<6H:`-APGU6U7.T&9Z3<
%9QX[",;_W6,>WS0+/Y;GQ`E9\*1E;B,S19Y21Q7URDVQ'.U(DH?[Y9)4S1;:SO8(aUM_a$,
=0J^XWCT`,?KUB7`?.WO(.H<<LEX1FV<I*#"7S9I8$:QVSQA&,ALALEU_-F/@OB5,=R`ZEV9
K_Z:5EL\$EWPK%,0C%3;N0L0J5O>Q:I>'M*\&V.#RZV^.T'\KS4aFAZ`aKa"CB%'a#-IZUR^
LIXRX==8P>(%;E23G]#TL]"QV6FK0_YE_<$)Q2MBaD5Z-$<U0N'96,_N*W/T9YFCN-GN[Q(Q
"@GP2`[L8%>4H*3'2$)Z"L;'ZT4O.T%2J1%?7[<SY`RL'`CL2V_\LMYI&[8//:2D@#B30]P:
M0P&5WC_"4N<'"6GSDM#XCV5$9#<>GO\a>[)0=0`EW7QY8LV8RR-94UR_QN/>IQ*-M;[AF#*
4_J:)K.OVY@DC9OLK)AUY6@N]K4,7`5F^D0"8(YIKDE8^F6)NS@P\0U0G#KIZE#@6&]`6J6,
BS5M2I%-W`C<2M:@?/A^NE=*VC#8%A%'2/QG89BQNX`DU[:[]`C\C+1^V$:TMO=TPK[KX9AD
'2F,8#^$X(3*7@MR_MYO9(RSZ+.HYZ^C7O#@Q)-2C[%IF;a'2072L"T@I+ZC]S84C:/:]Ma=
%;_4PQ;F<&X.I4I+GF/AB.>0A@/*Z._5<"9SX5*C`,;21@JOX,QKJ(@@)YFPI?*?1"JF@T8J
1`?NK.N4K)#:1U&9DR+]N3"D$]@N\-&,(^*\GRCFQ,M[P%UJ#PHM7'>53C8/5L/CU^8@?ZK^
N[C\'>8TSX`J$(1IK3X4KPC0*80a.QL7';WU6MCYU-<.F%($2D,%=^I5ZU[6B29,G3B5W5C?
CP]S(a-(IE$/36?-C0#IN,KE-MG[O_H5L?^5AOT-K^T6a;[(U0"%B@Z<C)I7G*XU"A_;2*7)
UH9+J5,R[`9S4M-,M\.FM%IY%aJ4='3XB_RH8&$X%)'a*):9DH9??DL0H<"T+9)aP=.F'6^\
)IG)*+U50GB$*8R+*+.P\:(E%?N#XF';7%a)YC*(_Y2O+_D-%5Z'IED4=O[`>=G)\<LIT8=>
KHD^/^="6C<_XS*"Z%<-T>Z:2>M5>QXBQ<6?:5A->%6I,Q"6%\B,YQ=C"6H[%=7MI%<-C0`L
V;98^/4<a0566&QN8>MJFXU@4%D,IQH/AY1A]aQX+;V[RKLIYJJW"Y=6WED-;_]M)S-P@*,5
`R+T,KLZWUGF6A9CV=Q/:QR$9[`_,PC?KHXG3a&.88<"1Q%9L8919LC&8;4NCM>316`T\4_.
\`"CV6:a>C?).]WSV^TVG/"N3aGK(<]V+&E.OM]LJ3a&*+O=P(Y%O-\$3Z_H(D[T9E$L\U97
@(0$G,+[%;D->R',57OZWBYHU:*A+R??+&K'F,/1Q-3MaQN[Q6_#ELW2.AM;B\/H_EI=6DHT
'N_(`0>(J`7Ta2O^IY7+^BFK8.C%;TKEF5^.R)#3:MFB<>AIFUZCaG#L[1REA94*Q1OXE?3N
_C_4UC/(Y9US'7VWAX<E_F$D'Q^`0Q&5'1I2a36$@:)SHQMG,EO::3G0R@74:V*[/aHaVVLK
3R.R7&PVCF-@^%IDT/=*+-[$:8L?/HM6EK-J?FHX`>FA$.8QL6=\<D/D6\"OD6-J<;?#D_0I
*?7`V#/8L,G]K%aG=W?4V.O`&E_]@C,,%$4^NJ_++T?<</SS.3*:]GAKN9a4*C;V?=[]25CX
8/\@O%EZXP,F/*/W-'=9)'WXV1KPD49ZZF^DF<Y?1)8M^IN-NY,_W_#]I+T[@EP8<:#$_%_Y
8\H,A-`B4)(3Y\2[IY:^FG^4R<KR*2%8NHW.'\V\@*V[TT*??R%\@U_T+Z<3E^CG\\H9-1)8
4*9"-4)9@HV05><0NC,Y6OE5RTC]P%UWE,.?:2_4NG_)QWI=X_?4/#]PI'`#@H4WD$MPVa;,
$+-<IGC9WIH<3FO4J7;5HKK6P7^a1B/7W,>Z'>S9'TPPF7[.P/M8ZN#6H-V)DWG'/NNR0:F?
X3,ET7DFE6%EZK)*NS*@9HK8&_736,O[U@;A[V2C9aF;\^"7@&JRV7P\>D:8?%8T'OI;U15Y
CO\[.68[7='6>2N\<?W%[XP/9YJLL1B^JJK#0STQ1+QF_J<]AFQFS\D)OS9)W/&MW.*I3R2X
>T6,C-ZY#>Y,L'aKQ5-SB4P&SU_,CE7/8*3.'3+>ZU8-D>Q[$(`%<_"L^&WHOP(E-_/Q120a
WB0`F@Z,BF'HDWA0FEA/HJI*0Z-#?ZE>6';/Q4R2<:;F/aL#J*J5-`CY09<GaQ:$JD.a`FS0
D6^:2)Y(2/,(/I<N98A&L2@CUR;6>GW[GZ*MF>;HX]*Y-]UL@1WJ.;``AaB6'P^S.[(WaIR%
HB9$9K%*:(]0AJ>`C+O.B*@CXP.6`+'8L=-9H1<T77#7T>9L;"MK7I8?ZUOQYB$#J393U;6T
W+6B"B\PC/4$\3.7TKVZ/70KDFRGX@EX8C4*_-K]S7&_#%S7.JKX?7?L1%?[Na:/]D;KY;Y?
H9$-?4B:_>V.S'\25^Q6Y^$`6?6^O:&0#N>HS7KI_%%2J8S[]S-=Z9T6G,"R6HS?FBW;7TK?
>P*6YN$C]-A]5MOE-H04*>?-N_Y`(+Z6OZR^N/@*_^4"#0\&)WNQIKCX(GT4&>*+61;&*)S0
_$><a1*(S<6A2*FM81T2BUB5[a4.H/RKU<-ZGS2IH@9W9[UBMaA@,ZH6HJIH)6T2FJQN<[F3
<XZWF8aL]JEI_'@=;LR`*LS4$:^1>5+?5L]&E*8%V5[U[Z)%XKN:,,5>>7^^5S2Y&:`PN<F'
,HJ(]:7#UB[0\JD:Q-S_M4+S[0K=2]:+W>P*;.;8Y-**)L:W)LO3C^2_)0(21@.C*a(%$]D0
VF,9T6N`'%6/5':&DKU^6.%J>2$"[XaaDUW%%?JYG=G92&\23FKKN/E\"K.N&H?_H8,H;@\S
AQa\;C5`JE&<(.')?O%?6\IYU4F^FDRT26\:_1D\N=4=BV+a7L>#`/J+"][BM;/SHX"$(XH=
^D1DH,8*(W[5`9F6]ZT]01Y)^86VH'(WY::[*0ZS=[*N7P(1(FBaZZ-)YJ.KK<;B"2:I5P@N
%J;8A=^Q``L2(`%TPZP4<]Va&K>H^2;?E@a@&P*80T=QBON5#T&)<a"5OOIT9591]U-21M`G
?]VAP9GA8<).+XM5+SSK"aQEX81QEFD[H*&$F?\L@.>_(^^?89A5UT3VC3=+R<N<I.MSHY)9
.SGQB5[8\]E9R0=#_3^.R#T]1>1O_?]4RI40R&GO[58%CMTR^&Y9:<A.LY3B*+C&U+13ZX4[
I_9HUE-TD;T#.2"&=_4K-HD1S"ALH=`8;(=5L3[S5M4#)]<*G%[0Q^@"0?=\#)4+1Y6_LR.$
V'ZP9.[]3:ULZPZ\a#3NYQI?3E(*6G3YG&'FK1[]#V"C+0L*DC+'@:7C%_#X\IVUMCY"9I$S
",;X#JERK=0B-FF/AE^:B403*/OD-\CP+OF9MI77:4H*^=9-FJG=H<L9@6(*`4'@H4T8BLX7
a+MZ(9Z`\]"H0@2&EJ))NP8O'LHZNU+#K;*S2\N$`&U/0]^^L:BLJR<^V]Z`0@?<G`70(24>
+UF(`56((UHD.H6)UD2AS@O[N1+:;^'5*:=K>6;:-?`^5X?>,35H0G'6_9<5R@)KW$(1X%FC
&G;?#^Y-AHM1/;<*JDMZ7TP>^.H"N@J*"M8G_D\+a_DQ+>CI>JBY)[FI6;*=1@)^Q0GNZ(aC
,=F'Z4XF7FA]T:H4H#aM&#JQ'?6:U-2)*8a[]?aI#'D_;9FQ/RO\1N"T$PMT%DQN,UG#<(&7
^;Z-%ZYH'J6N$&"IY(D'1G4&(",^@DI@M603BR7S9>S6EL&+.J/UX9Q,/\I.J9U]8:aELC9G
R;M7#T['a?P:9G-;98S:"6]UXECI&_[.TaK^(BL-+J2[,76\.7HFA<NF'3Q"X-CA4Z_8^OUQ
EXD-?79/O[Q<,3NS3$(;SU8HVJW:5[GOEI&?3`)6Z7,</8Y*$]VQPK;5=3+P+PICED*?2P0:
R\&Q:$.Z"4:;BV#A\OW;GCF.2YM;O]Z7@E_G=\Q06K_ZUD>DC]DV.7'3_XO@'-NZNQ#a7%F.
I\T?Q_J-[.S7)H(7'aEKFA2P[3JYU?OI@a^MQF<:5&S8KP]\SGDA;%)&?TPEJ'[9#%3?NLT1
/^N=*_Y,.]B5VP$2)FY^_H$(306NQ,>F7K>M[3]4M`.FJ,FZ3L7%Q6'Aa[@ZHU/IO7TK6Z<1
#^)\915UZ%:\Q8R>^A@I83#ZD(WO]DC8K*\3:DU-IPBJ(,=W-#\<=Z@UZ3a@TSK=*aV\>O,0
T-V@;EVBBG.X41&UO18ID+B5E?E\$a^MFL0$@^IM5W15]:R2%$K.W?^&"5*M\5,5:S*9W`^V
]X:9=XPX#D+`6<#>^Y=Y$/6:)SD3<V#6\$&W2FDaa%L#=U=`T5NKP^?^4FOa@@(Y.QP$%L7_
+T66a_GW+B7JGILTZ=F"J,X45%aZa3KL@DY]J&BSaEDP%O_-CFPZKF%GZ[).0B=5#N_NF`\Q
2XKHQ9N[OD$_W]C]GP_=[/#84&:`aRT3#G(ZTN,Aa&BGF+#=#V>N'-6$3^R63TP7QUX4B#C;
ZW%<;J<(>LE9W\AEPIOP^POC::C-=E#*HP5R[2=A&/D5OS.[0#_1W?<QM`S*[;OFV0<$[CEP
B+L$U_D+;V=-SUQ):Z-)OT5RR8[+IJ)NTV1E*SG=R][X)?,MX%&+BS.?'LE?1371,ROVQQ-;
?WM0%GE&*&7T4)?L%##4DU/8;K.$+,<A]Y\/[DJ2`*>B(FM%1$7I9Y%I%+QAQ6@K8?O8/<;X
C7C/a"++&YP2%\-8]YN#-XY2TGD>[YX=,H5^25"\Q8W`U7H:T$TQ4R,E-0YM.YO^J]K"A:#Y
>K7RYT0>POZY94=2@=:J3%?J>3S^J'9O[6>R6L`3-VV.^4Wa".*.^#*6OC&\$Q?TIL>@FFF\
:6VL*+7QI6YJW3GW));'(2D%-5J9`T:.]HU7<E3CW`SZA=E/8=,AXLNaCZWV258O4`;76X%1
W3V&Z#M[0W@OE>$9Z%JVT0P0B<1Ca*HA?6,%)=C\V7/\0/;&PJRZ\?N%H@R))W</R+L_?PO\
;UI=7*BOT%?(YQP(+.+`Y$WK;Y`"<@0<]2QF(C]@QOS>D[C+&&4.8_@R;KaD2`]I&69+:>OP
(%=>:"Y?_6M@O=LU2?E7..*)5O^38@Q?IO#T:(LCB_)7+$+F<5+IU3]#,#"3E.T4Y/@'UB\/
*RRUN0>S[D&LJ>$>]BF'9"W)9OOE*EA&&:D28&Y3JI#ZML7//\)QZ?BYU3&9J#T*G?Z[P;HY
`963P[47@/3;=UFMR$YKMXYAMW/@*Z[TB,]^7^VJ\3-06C)4/)']71LVX=?(9[JU%^N2@6E^
:PE#^;[F)+TS`+CG:6#`@4Y@-1`91JURY<+'O7S>YSR$+_FK@;^FD#R*(0]<\<W?R+^MDO&K
_+*>$3=SN#>\T,3I>>D^-R+"@U^2**ORV%C%-V*U.,'/W&=5?$25?Y4'(\NLN,7B*_?^/C"N
SL;Z<-)#6]4A`C70L@*YG4,W%aY'9TUB?2>'YWY,B*CE&5?O$%1/7XTBEA.Y^//=GMSCKN5B
%YC3HQS1']/"[Y2TC$N\.A/<W<&L4aI237^aKA3+BS*^+G/T?ZT2=_(B.\&?%Q("[+QU3S8O
KYTC'3SV8OHK7^HQ*PW^Q9BU))Fa;F##0:WV@%I57&%^4KI>9_+$.`5_3HW]7NDJVGY]a5_A
RL>K7,W13>Z*O#?*[2@`?6#E"X$(W^:M4YGKG[a*-\L/;P?Z'4'a'B6?0&O+TBT:-VPSWB;K
)<BE#_3&M/[T<'D4RO'`-9L,6B->&9&5/T'I@*\#?%\%S#^N)76%[Q24a]"&3Z>"=;,@,"Y=
F.FG9HRV71V6#YY2N#-MTGFO]_[9:#-YHQ6%-I88;52HFR\-PPHE=&;K[8=G<ECLV;[^"BO/
UT3G2M^<J0Q^K_YI].=M:DMKSG.UYPO`*\ZOO*1%=Y.GTV4=2&"S"*>7M0%L)IH%Y:3Q7`A0
I6*X>`<M2aC#N8?3AH"WI9]'KM=>TE$U[$F>:.;_2)UT;R%%81LD':2"IQ),K.UO)8/-IGBK
@L:KP@N(?'KU2$D$XK/83(3Z(/8#UT`KN\E32/:=0I2Y>*]0.]%6.UQ:-5C'G&9%IO)PRQIX
SI-/\I:9;_=9\$@OQH0EPD"La&31N$=U(RC24CY`=2NQ)J-DHAMG>I:RQ0DME#BUVPY\*BAI
I](%$^\[F'_7^GP(YU+2=[H)OQM%5A1B7"7:U%?$T6"B9&"RZ]H%R>85O$,4)X3Y$JXVMEV:
*1'&=EW;^(FSXB<#\\"?S]W8@aXDKK&-]+=L7EB-"`<4)?US%&5A,.9*?`G9<[+G9"=ZI?WO
'/JAQIC*Y'Z($-;W=%75%0']P$84/\;FZRF,O4Z46'[Ka]GDKT/4DW2<X858?NQ5P\8]"3+7
7KG6)[D`#>DUW"Ga81"FL29Z$F9DXBQU+\*[[_8^P($'D4@9+a#S5<a4H(_JU9TW<:SI:,[Z
._[,\\0QFN+`8_27][T8+:MM=79^;C=?ER=BKC#4-)#S=+ZE*9aY\Q9P$"=WBA)=.S=6B$#0
1C7EK?O$4-@QN*VMKaU/8T[_GL1FWHM8C&_<'W9(D%$[K=/_#+a1]4.IP#X$.Y)2[GNY`.SY
[G@'I2,OZ*>"[$JBXLV`@E12`B2IQN8>K`C7$=0GJ(V?;,PH/7>A?1&C(\;R1MC^U"PZ"%GR
$;8^-FGVZ$[2;<J=7(.-868OXO7\#XW'&N=8]8.R30?a2/299V?#/"W-@9..\+;%\/O0F<KC
B.H:FDa"K=)4>`_[-<S%FB=K3C'-(428JT)J++2R3<[@NPD:H=A`T*"*WBMB*H^;FUL,$_M?
">a*EKL`2K%`.8H^/Q+@)`LS+@D4ID\V[\I<@S4]'I&93IC[4K1#ES_AYBDP_A:1D8CD@6%C
;L_>,S_a54E*])A$,&#<'YZ&9FAIXL)?%C?%FC]]F#HT==]U9]KVM((C8+GNK5]9_AC*C9R*
@[E@K<1`^$'"Y*HW87-IOMRGaY)<V5A99(<-"M4MU=#JDW`YT?\AXS**C=\N`S2R%)M91,\O
]YF2K>A30I;-2-D(Y`)R'&36%)L@9RIULA#LO9;^$")LaA;<J\,CS%-'a-BE0I(X]K-L0#>Z
L3C;1/56269Q)-?O47@OK00TLR.,E@,R4"<&^(8QaJ^UQ2PQ,P;JH%.)T^OU5OBH$G;,>R8O
_<1&67P0'6<P?*?*">H%?%P=J`Z@+/[\F_X^TA+SG//1M8JG7J^O)P]MN>aZBLX8LOTZ9T=0
^`9,/5TJ@*)6"FXPH?NKJP)4CAEW28$66(0`^YAHO_[?75RVP`S\H<X$RC"?US@=W>VJ'39B
?BWL^PLO/2&[GX:RH'X8QG6U[W._8*B<3]S?I$B%Q3G>3C=T053HG]'VT#3;JI#2a:J5X`6a
K.MO5SLMOV="@;OV\T0\-N>-EX<4A*N[;,T(6W57A&4DP2^ICWFB)<*aH%0CHP-0IZVa6@4(
05K]2#%]M:7Qa-86[;871^0GUBG<@8^/BZ9\H*#:?EQM08XQ4XXV=0GI#G`1]`+F_*H3<3<\
Ua*OT%N@S`2I*[W2J<S5Pa\DA0BEaIR:W>_^H-]6]S<#S1F&:HT%7B`ZK:+^$<$-[VS^SJOY
F=\OG\X@11O/_C0.1@$?CV-#"1(JS\H)I'"YE3A30\=6OM#[QT'*Q\UU5EB:,CDLN.EA]U\4
,HWQC\5]9-5E+$316T)R<Y.'QV+N5:/(LDT+OS@/4+aZ`(+K^)VI.J*M]]7#P6$6OFHRAP<4
49W)P$JPH5:W<.TZG&_aKK[R08:<:-ERS6<U^"B9W\33,"Y;E:(&LPAa?T0]*3W9)/GT/4@I
aKRE<S>VX<U%^^L>83U8P.@78W=C$ITO?18CQ]L%@NB>V&DFB+I*@MT0@C(@SUA"C[T=IE19
7?Q$]0E>>PHEPY65[TMOQIZEL;<Z3YY8FR>'(G/"*9V^#F(2>4WM<[+O0=;":O>1;.O4aZZU
(>%a];I5>J6V7F;^`I3H</FL<$Z%`<#<`%GO=?1I]++/>8,40,)?]9V/2RM_3]I.06:H4B)S
FU0@`LN`&R*,P6[LQ'/Y="EOR4:-).O>DP&=1]E(#+G(.>`WJJTW2\ZAT9E#1`:`]"#4%&:D
H<W+$=7,5#=IU'&;AY&GI`L;&P+`M6+3\O(^Ia2PS0Y"Y_X%B38FWK#,]OFH[GW84DZLC?+.
(/X?O",MD5.+5&-("WWBPJ.;>5<1Q@S<Q[+[S:5LMNK@-G]UMQ#M1$`I+S53T/5;?J^G7[C#
HR-7Q06O'EE]V<@\IQ8T2UJa3$_WON=AH.X31?XV>'[aRMJ-N@E7O\\`V@0`6aM/YQP4/OQZ
Q#OUV77$O*Q4-9_5IA-"]<%"';UXLB5=\6"]\M59EB4P,]I(@B2O+J+%_M:O>*K$[AL[G#`6
:<Q_`J0LRQ%[3aMHLB>R=\(>^VSR[SQ)@UU7Z8//+'QWD1.9`Z\1V4M#+.*MU:99a$*.V**a
%Q6K2%`4ZR&`1QU$E<9E*OSGS\'?K49QU[0a*M)O>[GINS8;FI%J5%WFLA9/]KJZ>(@FQF(K
<]/\3Z:X70VY;UAYZ7#*.>F`,G:4("H#=EVI]KL8Z5K/8a($%8<3@AISR>=UW)DLQ,Y><MS2
6L@%T-$BM#^"H'ML]P4ILT0$A^#_$<@_5)G27C9>a$6Qa,Qa1MA63Y2T0F`H;5^\@-7FaZ8(
:?aXVV?+4=SV.`N*A*3aKYAPQ[1$P^R1%H"*34?J4S$P#_I.99(@$&G&HUGHU\I2JY]>]4T5
GQ->/'*Z+6&>%%K$.3YX"8/N0B"P#%U5\1Q#LM%KFC>6&:D[I3'A=7L=K23IUOJ9TEOY1]'-
G<E].`1%U&X[67-S&JRQaKN,K:RIA>L[EX$_C/5[LU$/19+TXK:Y3$9.I>C;8.XY\XCP:3"#
Z-/CT%%%O_%5:<O;&JWZI>)2YGE^X05`\^aQ=D)I$KPRHSL)W?M#D:-898:$^`QDPM7U`WHJ
]Q4aBJa.(=/D@&9>-C.]\6]H_S8+S@OJ5*/0M995FaY56PT\(QMQQ)\%5IaH)25CE+L"/4=(
aA\Y,A6aU_P?Q#aNC=\Q.KV;^\HOJ9&_$\R._DX+#3CZFC$D\XQ06?"O`6%>G`W'L&4[[XVI
;;7G6?2@&I=JC)+7:TaQ+H9Z&?F4_D'a<0S`-PK'`(;KS0^+L:@I+)I1A/Y['E.?JW<75@3(
E_YDS8/6G[:>EBTR@+^S?J6G*=IF8NS=QO'MKXE(=DACI7*T'\5_VaGR\?1,@E*#Y%GRG":;
1E12I_]KY5PA+0-B,C;K(`M0E_7TS\\ZE<a:@aP`+:X0-;`aF)aF'Q?6HW[U3VWKX+>77K88
BP#D]4VG_/&[]CY:<WCP50YV`^C)"V>X?"K,RV@#:.<78.99OU):OV=*8/(L&*%>T[NP2)\H
9]+1R'_$E6^8E."COD#X`:V[[",`O'P,\X/GM=I.''/S+Q=CS\BM94'Z':@7P&?V&6ST+(>/
1,"X7`"P)%32X_`C$aZ]`X?6'D@8&[[CHX$Y)$a%-4]_1VVB:(VTNFU$-MGG?1]5(:-ALG@;
-F/F))[^EF:5X++a3#)5$J`YZ-@HHWN"'C))NG[KV3a*I<1\85*'"#a8$a@L;/8-+<[932U&
\Q(:ZY5.)\VFXDGBOA4KQTOQ7P./T?9%^%X7]F";^,5<O:."C(5JB-BO(/K+2LX?2\B.B\>R
&VZ65JEYC9$C*;H&`RTU+];0=;TJ%1_M[)\INO`GAE^"F_-^G[=B*>WW?W/':`P<C_J`K+X%
V^*-UD;V)NCH]:[>$(C6\.P\,4>4O-])&VF(B6WQ0G:2)aKF55W[BX7SN[&/>J:GI96A=<9M
7@DJX$7RG/$*TP0LR$&H+/GOK>6J`H/9E?:U@7++D>]/&GVCM2%==(TBJIZ3I?M2N)/*Y?C5
#=76H1)\]X'A1GH'Z==XX,)7/%4&-R.TZ^)DZY(5*ELRJF`&>P/-(ATI+DP_O-G);2=]LWY<
UW[>E)LV+3P""$_89#(2YHM:'3V"9L-3"3+a0*C:*B:U_3H93^_]'H0*\D=9OUZB\U>Ka2D+
@UJ("^&1ZR4.0W>QPPa<"D2?82/4\&IHZ./@Y-[0^E*$-@JEP#A87W1T>*?YMY-%1"`._G$Y
)E/D.I8<"4]0R#A:L%&-%_0XH^2OQ)X)F-U\C;:<K0INA?`>^-_[XF)DRB,S\K%0*:BWB0S\
%J8(_5Xa\NA,A\DYLUU=9E111?\@4FWQ&_GWNC1,]@P:IOTB0?_80-<U1\S5^3<X(&/F$2>N
X+OH@T=2>GT9%Z[(#*T0+^HO%&=+50PQ,([DQF,"NF'Da&?_6]*M.'OQN'[ZZ?SG9V<WX.<D
<'V7S[`Z?Z0_a923SV%@`HF,=aPD,FX8-/4&A"V%HE03YXT[A0<;3I:.$45.B.X<H%`[X(XF
^".>Y8@.Ka,7a7A/M`^6X&-VAKM*,:>Z<9_]J+#MC[?UP$,<\)#T\R2>D6AIN%J;8;[<KE.V
:3U=U]#.$DW=ZLUD3$==?$-^?T/C\`NE3YY0$M2J[%"FRW-a6\3;5'"#^(R<Q4(.GU"VA3Ra
aRQQX0\]UA<5N>*_"'IRVV6L5;"RH=-VS[?R`??T`>>)(U"+\1R?RI\YUK)$<<-UL58STRG8
L(a0:_R(J_5a'34NF<?>3%")7U_Y]73[G^>*,%6%IY@.V6X&PUJP7]W71AR^\\&O?(Z1X("V
XK`?K@>YZ6I6+a*IS#E=?@'"=5'ZT^1IO6%*:D16\4]Z`:D*.46L&TAL93-9X8:C33%\/[.N
7^XR6.CQ6ZW/GJH@4?@@[&.-79&A<C/IBC$aUXI*>YCA^KI8"80/@;L4+WQ*?)`X1>)]>\TC
UVBRLCYA6>/A'/&a=DS@^Q[/H.[8P\7#+/FP%%ZZQ2U/H0O^Y7YW++@:I0>)\6H?SUNYZ=S0
'8)%X#/3"W):*_X#()@:91G*a%<5M_*R<)RL2(BK2"9E7)1(8V4PA.C4P35`JZ%-%C59),:R
AA]*]O2a7C/$X71]3L1;LJ289?+.>O%N%J\Y^IG:aPCC6NB31%:WFD0OFI)_\99(X\O%M3A>
^V_''_/&FZ>DFL+BMSQa<]=L#3+&W)$_P`a%WD^*RR`7K9'5TT#*<Y*T)DS^'8K,+EQB[$`D
FC37(6H@9+NG+1E\+;['?X0HA*4"Q;?QM^>7V($*TPW5'B@WS;[+RS_:3#ITR8GT3XYV3C#D
88IU%#^>+3GaOP=]]EC-S=2MR\)\2V(D.=3)4;LRRR2>S+CO;'%W0VO8S20""QL^(K$(D4BY
WMB9Z&EC%D#>@HD4F.2<?XG7RQ;_,7>S[UDNT([HWL+8/Y1=`)A)/632D*"<%GHPJ0_Wa&$;
_*]1816M^VN$,a-L&IYP0@^X#aI%LR`,O,=IN$Y2:2$7a/+JLCY<K8?-A0Ja('ZO'F@82/UV
L_52_0ZN.5?W@P+TD\Ca?WYV<T6P-I`&3^M'X)7;$_"2`DBM`>;1?P7B2^"+K/0;@%=&7O0.
8M2#U,XK>N[S@3-*/PJ4@"2$a/3QH[[7>,20,XA31\02SHK?%\]]9DP@+'Ua8^XK0&X6X)9+
5S/3[`7J1APD;KXEHXQ%"=>WHO.K;OG_+TT8_`%]K-G3^R5S/I9HT5A?66BP?GPa_GU)8D(3
_P)^aU>0$G[Q?"GHA3aP20CKE_YS5X@"&"G1_5;CM1FL5XC+a+2J-/7\>HC%7aD<?'6(*A5Z
YC:,H,J$a<OBQA.1$"J-?>9EID*aD[L3U#X3L1:'-;?)-MD`RZR2V0a`>,+J4H1DY,XS0/YJ
+8YMFW>HE'ML1(CM*O]8T*4:B9*2I($]Z'*K)'L,X4K#X,J3C+D'5KB%M"+QH.)SQ""8_.ZF
&)XV>a5B@Z*RL-5-],A)R&*['3<I>)R8\@V3>9SR42TG$N__]=G"W]$3U4D6R7J<"a@H#UZV
]8AXW9",/ZQ6(5.QK(847PW>S`*KXXP_#'5:9S<:'B"RDX6@X\JM>OKa8J>=)U%/[98\_XYD
?R?N"`N1[\<;*BD]F*\&22?.@D))["Z_ZW1`TY"FPDJ&O-[I^5TL0774RZ#2*VC%_Y[MM3IG
N#)FR->6FF.)7&KRT]VUDK=S$GQ27R:"[=11,34#,Qa+1O<L<;,G'9ACCa)E<")P]]-X'%AE
>/Y+>8CHRE.(@]7T)%SE/8#8]>>$OUWF-"<V#W20ELIE73^^`PQ)`++?_Y?DP1'DFTV0)4K/
`^0(:*8?O,)%?9?<V'L8U/_*B+(JN9KN0]UP-_0IB0U\B=E'X`?]4?+I?BO,B89'$CV?:5JF
@A`93<Q39.=R#E.\XZ,V'>(B3(3Z'4#]aK*A&E0'KKa)(EWOQW>5(M%PV*L=&$&"\59S"-=S
T/N=PP=<[2@a`]X$[RH1XYRWUM5VY/2#*[,,\)?X4BN":a[Q$$RJ=,7@%R;1^FKWXJ\B*)M$
I#*.>/Q*'SS+6a).6a@HMFE9@\>HU>aDU*U&ZGFCG(H):[Q$B*9;S@(0*"7NF,)+FLR\%///
J5'1C>R:?^4/Q_U]2U8[5%Y;46B4KYFE;:$@T9>;B#+KS2<*,=H;BUW/#6`%^MZ._`S;S0_\
#90RDIB$P:a.FYAFWW`HFODXMC[J-T@FVPH2;"\*>57WG$.\OG$S>)E8[*V:6:&/)I>1M4A-
=&1(25><E/H^4*'>Z#:=Y4TC_J%9]W_H[>2K]MM?0C@N#P5U-P^S_7SU%+*676F.%\*9@C*J
IQK85UF3ERa+.:_*3<:K"#`J+`]\0EIIN/IIM*KRA&3I-Z_"KQ0\)8YU<PP\7<(S[F=&NZ:S
*TKZO;XFS:P@]4[#RX;6+Z+%=T9*V.FMT=_*8_Q-/3N\RREI'KGKK(;>JL2A#A?V9X?>_9Q?
,^IX9BOW)8&R4;PaZ#M:=6*MM0Y:W=/`/'7VDE="M,G05T&WX\S2/R$&90CH1D?I=9S#4,0^
;X0;M$R.\TR',,<Z;B@6KIOI@<:'E:<a8W)&)VUQ?Q<6)Z**Na4Z%IGY0905:SW5%Z??M.Z;
[9(N*#P_XYCaSDUA@P4+X?D`#V&YCSOP'77,0EGT:1ZA(>0D^O%N;>#,6(+2&)4*754%V;,2
#8UH)G%)'-JK0-^>a1GGAK&KGa)D&GCMRU$`LPT7",S'H0'45%^6'O?FUB6";R2C;3S+KEP7
=BPGYECS8=M$I5X<]H5*HQ<)P7UY?.\,M60/F\C*8L9[HU5/H6=XC7;&>,KCUT5G1^"Y_S#E
$<2-WV4(0F8@<.a*.(3aA>N,Z4[UW`D0(PY2ECD3UIC5*G)8_]E*N0+G(T#<05XT*(K1<+:X
_(*M<@ZZXI*+->a290OA09G._U354<+*F[1H`<*$;4>"1-?D$AP/EHQW'8DC_P=aB-RP\%0H
?CD_KQ?N:^IB-KD/KF/I;(//?ULQCIZ4B448\0D.=1%9M:4"480?I$J@Z#O%7<U=DCXB%K>R
<_+<]S1X+0G/2>+;9"&NM^79.$3NU*6;W(R(4ETC@OA]+VOI4SK98KZE&/2;=1%EQR50Ia6\
4`/3\F62+=GEBS8=Z_D0Q#IC$#-+O'X?E_>4L8IY]:KH+X:TA:]18(:*`G4R7@:]$D44$2_2
F#%84,*$D3#:*<&S+X3OG,KX9E\\:`(67KCYY$=5C$/7G:;1Q&C`:+@EZ0&BX(*@D^(BYDC.
UGB+X8XZ(_&'L-(J964:'ZT%'(\%9>F''T5GL[H/'^UW_8,=QL:\UVV#\Y<C8*H=8WP%Z4>=
D&IC1CH'^#7^MJTE#)^'&U75*,G:GC.+G@MV%(`;HRU646,`PEUVa\3<ZD\HC''/03M6.?$-
`Z5RQ?9MS=3YU>7X[LR'V7-)$_I'M;3#4W''V0^#XO;6UA*&&&=&"_R9GAFQKIZ#?&GS+R5T
SE,BQ#`5,@0L64^5#K%2/27:[(-*1MZ=U.&0@(2#F]EW_]AZ+$5<POU#<$_4:S@SP$&[[NG[
B[1E04SMP=\7/6X6PD]WGQ&OW8PI_.^OF4.GQP(>)+>^#T`?4F^*S>CB>>Z+C354H7EP'C#9
QW?6?ZHZ9XQ742:_2^7@F>V^MA(@QSPH(L5:7`J]@EH5LVLOML\<<F+6_<:FW=S"17BJ/7-#
[VCU':TC5S@<>OO"N@*(:BOaSY$/I>9D9F2_J&N0WBD`#?Y^TR?R^C#9OOU-ZTH.5\Q5'I^X
HK1CP7%XX0?@2&\2*B$XW@@NBR1(/0;F%.H1AQ)M_$+[&XD8"'O:QV&:9<U)-S:4.7$AX>E>
3Q1OR^K7%<BAK^"RI[A-A1:;3PMR1_F,">]B;B[D[8XK7-+'SYA]`2Q92,/Y:/3B^.D1/Y=,
O[E()ETR0MK9Y=D:;'3+>8&+]U)#"HNZ\K/_XQY.23)&aH[I#<Q+$0,D(R+2)6S6$>\[8Y(\
RV<^4`+B7D<O8\("Y`1KF2H%''J8$AZH*S`a:J39Q:>1O]'))W<LPUa*@_B8S_8?`SH(``*"
U-I_]5#>9*T=_@0C,MVIFV@[-;VXQ7/[A_:B^H?KJI/L\D"R_D-B;?$*;WZLMa'4?BF=J8LH
_U,Y-<'/Z,>UA4J#,N.(,:3T4<@9T\&WM\`X?Q\_9OY@aT+;D\MY06@G%2%S=\'"L8_02&1U
@')(YS2[S)Ua=LS2]"-]UCC/U;/WUP>&KWX]2WQK\^Y3,T+*MO_C*&>46[a@C()4OF=XCQTJ
L&BA9CYN-NK3S9:KB<H_,P*(:\)>ME`O0LE,$A=6J/(\<*/;&I#1SM::IOMA32?K"ZFL[STU
%:=TA;Z+JG#M1_$T6Q@?HA12Ta&$)I&W9\`BQ)/L]ULYH,Z8<6,9Y@)Y62'2EWYT&%JHEA;a
M%AB*6O0\]N8*D@E[<D$%\$)AXU'.L="^W+CK;L&T">0&,;AAY'8"&7?5PWOIFPI8(T9NAP.
(-_F@V?\$$M%(.^-$aXUC0&(R,=I:aY<?JT&$M%IN,;[M.%.]->M0GUG8OZ:[#`F9UN*-EBS
+%7]5*.B&OY3.\-F(KBH2[9L'VN^^;@]6NPE)@/;LH62_,FBT(-&/6@)S.EJ9^>AEG:RNa.0
*O,=PI+S[D[9BM355XRF/J>T'\=KAQ@W7(LTD]8Z[#W]3\OQ,4)AC%C\'3"C9?O:?^8M1J(%
SM`;YC/'VOa;V601"E8.<[R[>a@?RQ*IGCV'NN'6TPR<0_a\R#FXBV4#A]4:_1/32"FSL;*\
.C>>**8K<7)C.86:2H9\*<U`a5IH(3C^SN*C/G[9HVFA]P2<@.,9]G+JXH$(F9,LO[7C4YM^
I0S]6&5G(#RFU+aCHHPJG%ZK1\,S<DA2@>K(ZA;1@A.Z4_LZ1MA&QT/&6OM_H>6:*YWS_:ZZ
;JO@B;="WE';$YLNS5$P%^.^A<[C0"LD$J[)J6)27B`*"PF,>VUGAX'Q\WMC&&P5OCa+.Y1R
2_X&3L%0,:"$O-2G`&]&K(3A_2N\\$5GKU@H5S@aO"333#E`E)KT+U)5`^+*#IFY::^L4%)I
C8+)DK_?=MQ)I*OIX6)G09#939_/>a=223[B@Q#?$8MY81^CJ'1Q)GO-Y<5%?HD^R2[`$KCX
]?,I)3)6<4F^=D@R_KU5`<,^L85?K<E04H3O>V(:K[0&RO,N9=O*1V:_LH"-5V_:]&#a2N2\
+('#aM;;FF]/>@E-C#9L&?Q:QE_@-BDA1aZ+'2NBG:aYY)0LA7`QA<`Baa7X"HZ;TSX*ZRL)
5#%U8>I',aW4ZUKV$/.,P9H%-LJD^+.PP+\?"EQU-*XL(>8OQNM4NH(BA0W2N5;4APF6)SFO
UNA.-#^DCVS]^3>LXE`6(7036_6VDU.Z1_+ZK>[Z"_]3#ZF`YQHS1U,>_+J$->\ZN2$\'P6X
YY+GP+KMK8J4B&4Ya,1W>%;[@(M*0&BNSQCAW*H3*1TL>CIQ6G@X3AI3K@\'LKB.B,$B@107
"_+S$=IEOOQ-14F:1?_:'85,,2W;*JH0K`P&-)YSaU@O[DI`CTVF=[\Q'*V[O<3[a(5\`Xa"
XO.G"[;+\&/9BM]Q*GEJH7#ER2\,H`A6GDBY?0#R:2[-]T>Y>0<X^(IM/U^JM]>L'0PB=?(S
^U)\#U:GJJ93B*<E-@&NYHC'U#VH7AOQ9?\VRT'(BF2VE/@_aLQ_N)PN\%6CUHT?0[#2>\9,
;]BGP;5`3[aON48V=1OV\'Z,JaH>T/A%$B5'\%U&S[D/Y^U+?SI9,:M'R3PJL%RV3']$]D^J
1%E\?J2",.;2Y&'`C_&..-W]W\9IJ0J[O1VJ5#Z';0*5*VBD0)2[]=(<<BV_"@*.NHD2:VZJ
T+GU6]B+:,OS0TS2631DJV*.Y16#%2XD59U)EF._H#_)2^80JKP`9_-T[9M(T#4O)I^OC[W3
>S7FC7BD_7:_+UH1X3$X28NXS<ER%6P<]]7U946_\O5)9AF%<T4V<"F*KFAJFO5R1@I3F)JM
]FDPA;P25FA9UW(EYK)$:CBAHM`7SB-\V#QF)U4";0(?`H8AGH"a(/T28X8E?K.2QVAL#1D$
&&UQ^R=7?aFDX:AE)*6\NBM.+VI6a+_2K6:IG67BW4X7DKVO)J:`\_'\:A`W'SW5ZCV,S0'J
O/>?.)P&?E76B?U5#X3":WH3MNMS2"$O[MD\`Z=EUX_/_R6.@O"TW=#_5L_IG2*=Y1>SGZ9a
U`N::=$V`?*ZYX)S$.UW(G4TYO$+T,8-*<N,W><H2R1\P(W&>*>A10J#,DXQLME_(9$4(WX(
>R8J;G.P5)Y3(4-^8=>OA4]BF5T&$T=)"\;QN<7G`;==7)LO.JBRE/7]*47*>;GM@FB%.\8Q
<0#/&Q1))EB6+XT#S.^<]3)<MA)_R8,8ZEYEL3V+.A1'%<:8<:"-@PR,QS&SMV0#*@MGL<N.
QaN@_4^F8(MS?7MR6"8$`[C%8,XN`*D[@R07GC/KM>/T[aaHTFTS>?'EOXP81*<5(L')$A2C
%"\%%TH'>UUE+CG_Ta+a7$;VW3'JJ#VEK^]&"`QNS\;2=DQC:S^*?QDR;:+PND$`_NE81@VX
NT3K44:;5$.W%-$>Q(J`@4='JYES^WP%3Z$[B2-Va.QT6HBG6$8*NU*#9:5\1>$)T<YUaP/Z
'YKYMP?7I/"/aL/I?"2OD/[PW.2J3K5UN[-F[6@RZL9(WOL(F`^LCL_K\IDE,_#J$P>+BO)W
?A6;@+R17O%`32?K=a6?X@"UJ[,V^A5RRSOW<.<-A?5aI&=0..4*LCLC2*\SX[@PCRJ\QBT:
3:/4NAB+%GaAC=TL451(@FN6$$]7`4>&<7`L8:.4S$#=IAaSWW*UA`<GEGQ^LZ@K"<OK;#CR
;+a`P*6+Z$2_^M1L&%+:7%L:MW/*'IXRR26^;U%J<VG3;a"0ITCIOA,]0[RTS.\.%>SXHJ8B
\CN/*;C>3UPM";;\&`JIQQ53;S*['8-43a;MEYIK`-J5]J%&+P"_5`T1B"8]6#2B_B)(B,;V
UDLXLL%77MDA49SJ<C<K/MJ%&Q3)`J#$<:ZN'MZ1XVHOA'<4W<"a6P$.(L>ERL\T*+(-4OA.
H-8WY,/?Z$U3*QaK3*:(Pa1"+3B+U6+Q][S<\(Q+=a.+KV7<Ta)FW/7B)OR<M;Q($"3*YGY7
7^+N8[$OGD$RI-5WU:D2>/7(%Z03=ZI^HE12BFX6PN\3#1R=?[:$NCY#`B[DD$G/_JMAMQ)G
@T2FU:aD,CR1T@/1_S43*5;'T:VH8=>#(,Y^X:L08]I=B@5WPZVP7*H$DOK9.-^^Y<IY,/[W
I'-6%=IaI/#D0SCC3&XC@>##%])<GEV84DTV>4A5`#)Y.Y]E.)2CH(++"&#CDP;,ZE-`5)a0
Z(B?>*=`T.*-#V@aVO5L:O`F%"L:G2MR/K[^N+.6VZ5M3$ZK183B_O;ZC(==\KV-?'.L"G^D
4AQ55QHJL:G*=VF.E=%_D0G_-]T3-@JB<J*<N-U?`QXZIBY_$UQFYQ42'5Q/XLZZ%LO0_W_P
%a+$O<J_J`@L@XWaUZY45IZZ5,<LYT7^6VCDL(S''#W530EJ/38/["&T20?Z&?ZIYF7QL3D^
N]]L&T,@70SH4-=-aI<0PJ[KPZLAYKPBOM<NB5>>.1G["3DF3IZ`DN\&14(,`:7CLB%&E#S_
Y4;^7@;_KT<\FTS[$VI$BS@*IBVA7@\5;O[)&_+6J;CPL/PF%F\MC)/F$-U%7L7$P\T<;PT0
OE-5S.RLU((S3$T])MZ"PEES/(`D$XRBC%J>G1BQGL#8Q(X;'VE5+Z1M\ST-,F07HT<WIALE
4W_X%,?2.KTO>=6R';C><+@J3?,@*M^X4MOUZ)OV.7O:X`-6)V6>M/ZFTLCVS@R%6*;=<F\#
C-C]GC#4B["CX@8-ZHM+91a$IA()&>-aJDK)a-<@[RON,6Q11;/@A*POW5`7JG7#+>,4aDY,
A__-QWGQ)"->W&W/IR8HaMA#[<^SQQTJE0`^D&BC'*PE#M`Y%%/9F*.L["0__7)94V(VNK8(
)P**?=Y'#<I4WA919RT5&@X-80K:ZZ%Sa(B?`,/OU*_D'PN*W*+_?:98(H^ZV27&&WL(I@;&
#YT/_=*]+'*L<%WQN5.<&9G#Q:U:BQT`?N6U#?aLY<IW)T_'`B'JI6Fa95a1X-F`FLO/1D%6
/36I"\F7XWC18_<:>#SG<.CIEZ<0%HAH(E(&'<Z.\(W*](ZCW\,"GKE5HVVV>*N8LT6*G.$<
YYD5,5a.9@BIGUL*<Y(Z%\%NG7^R_5HYO`?.$%(07NWFO&J;+R"7-..V_.H=CU<^,`,a1U@"
,6,QMB?XPYLZ"9E>8M%[O<-K3(RY*>Q*[8`)[K==TM:%^HFY%J+@M62-2*\4LGBEa@8<MR.K
Z'G=W7+>9_O\/Z6MW8'S'KT`]V%E\[MZ:ZKKY4O^H.:WRL+P'#;_,Z4M)RJG'PGRR[(]OQQ9
8-T?G#P^37--^_;@1?"WQ];`[W/#,aQ&9(DO3CI<?U,O=[5%"S\[F_R3E?XEH7]^/@"P;X[J
.T,WEK,B;T(/K;N'@5>E)>4V')['`3?;W2[OC=']99^9JB4<$-:_N.W_WT/:U.4,)6X:$_1J
1IB.L,0(,Q.B&+*N-&Z"SU[4%@I),--%+2*a",CW7D:&"aF%?,>&;1I6(OF#=U42=]IHZ2-]
"U<BI?%=-/CM+NJSWMM>$M:VEJ^$964W8'@DTFS9&C<%7\ESWI\1^;.G(*O%7JFOWRGB-/X#
"W','>PK7:P=6?CLMS?HHFF@(/,B[H'#<=7">T+HRM_NYW(TNL;L:>Q(_Z1&`9UR@*85I2^&
-YZE[EH"+;+#J2,@3>I)8=/%9Y-FR-IB$;392)L:;/O"V23#a8.;4);-a5=QUWB7$QLJU\$(
#17'\)NC,W+W663L&/],(MLJ/3@=D@*83L-U<M>'83N8ZL-/#aVPC+I%:5UYE$%W@A:85,J>
@:_C(11T4L\,EA=LV(TTY2JN-E"2L?.:3.`E<R-4:,[+_;29!<END
........ You may remove this line and the following text ...............
Lines in the above program: 364
NETRUN is free and available on many shareware sites including:
ftp://oak.oakland.edu/SimTel/msdos/decode/netrun*.zip



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:42 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!lily.redrose.net!john
From: Curt Sanders <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna software for Macintosh
Date: 29 Oct 1995 04:25:47 GMT
Organization: a Digital Internet AlphaServer Site
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <46uvob$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.51.81.217
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna#46p6t8$[e-mail]

Can anyone point me to Macintosh software for antenna design?

73s in advance, Curt, N3TLJ

********************************************************
| "There is nothing constant but change." ï Heraclitus |
|                        ***                           |
|          [e-mail]               |
| Reunion Users Group (genealogy) * Hershey Apple Core |
********************************************************




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:43 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Christopher Scibelli)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DJ2UT- Sommer antenna
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 07:46:07 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <46v848$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-spr-ma1-15.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat Oct 28 11:48:40 PM PDT 1995
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Does anyone have a Sommer antenna they'd like to comment on?  I'm
considering the XP40 series with the 40 meter add-on. Looks
interesting as it uses no traps and shows a wide bandwidth.

Chris  NU1O

----------------------
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:44 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com!news2.realtime.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K5QQ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with Hygain TH3 Jr beam?
Date: 29 Oct 1995 09:16:53 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4702cl$[e-mail]>
References: <46sagv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K5QQ)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Howdy
I saw your note wondering if the Hygain TH-3 jr and hygain ingeneral work
ok.

YES!!!

I had a big TH-3 up for almost 20 years and I bought it used.  The entire
time it was up only about 30 feet and I did 5BWAS and even won SS-SSB for
NM one of those years.  So I was sure a satified customer.  Then I moved
into a subdivision with all of these restrictive covenants and got rid of
the tower and antenna.
I bought a TH-3 jr for field day and portable operations.  I use it on a
push up tower and it really works great.  If you were able to catch the
special events station from the Atomic Museum this August, celebrating the
50th anniversary of the first weapon drop, you heard that beam.  Had
nothing but pileups for two days.

Anyway, enough rambling but you will like the TH3 line of antennas.
You may also get a lot of comments from the folks who have a TH6 which is
a 6 element beam and it's a real powerhouse, but a much larger antenna
system.

Adios from NM

Jim
[e-mail]


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:45 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!interaccess!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ronald H Steinberg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: DJ2UT- Sommer antenna
Date: 29 Oct 1995 11:47:52 GMT
Organization: Rent Com, Inc.
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <46vpl8$[e-mail]>
References: <46v848$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: d147.sp.interaccess.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+


>Does anyone have a Sommer antenna they'd like to comment on?  I'm
>considering the XP40 series with the 40 meter add-on. Looks
>interesting as it uses no traps and shows a wide bandwidth.

I have the 40 meter element on an xp807 and it works vry well.The ant
 works very good  on all bands once you tune it up.You have to get to
 the driven elements for adjustment for a low swr on all the bands.
A Hazer type lift is necessary . I used a 25 foot manlift on my patio
to reach the 807 on a US Tower    73 RON K9IKZ


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:46 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsat!engineer.mrg.uswest.com!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!castle.nando.net!news
From: Dave Hockaday <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Counterpoise vs. radials
Date: 29 Oct 1995 14:13:07 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <47025j$[e-mail]>
References: <46jgms$[e-mail]> <46lgaf$[e-mail]> <46qp47$92i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1302.nando.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]


>Dear all,
>
>I am most interested in this subject concerning the counterpoise
>versus the normal wire radials - indeed for the Butternut antenna.
>
>Forgive me if I have missed earlier correspondence, but I would be
>most grateful for comments as to which system actually performs the
>better.
>
>My situation is for the antenna to be mounted about 10' above a tin
>roof. I believe using the tin roof may cause additional TVI due to
>electrical bonding between the sheets. The counterpoise answer seems
>ideal - but my question is does it work as well as a reasonable radil
>system? Running 3-4 radials for 6-8 bands would present some problems
>but I' prefer to do this if it was considered better than the counterpoise.
>I have not seen the Butternut counterpoise, but its dimensions seem
>relative considerable.
>
>Grateful for your time,
>
>Robin Gandevia VK2VN
>Ham Log 3.1
>
Hi Robin! I think that the tin roof over your home would be an ideal
location for roof mounted vertical. I don't think the extra 10 feet will
do any good on hf for e or f layer work. For that reason, I'd take full
advantage of the metal roof on your home. I'd say to mount the vertical
to thwe roof of the house, and let the roof be your counterpoise...

I've had roof mounted vertical before, and experimented with elevating
the ground system and antenna feedpoint as much as 15 feet. My
experiences have proven (at least to me and in my application, heehee)
that there were no appreciable differences with performance between roof
mounting (on the roof) or 10 feet above the roof...except for all of the
headaches of installaing an elevated ground system.

My vote would be to mount it as close to the tin roof as possible and
connect the roof to the ground connection of the antenna.

Maybe someone else will chime in here :-)
73 de Dave WB4IUY



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:47 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!news.ee.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!nnrp.info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with old rg-8"
Date: 29 Oct 95 14:56:27 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:47 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.ACO.net!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-ulm.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna for Catamaran?
Date: 29 Oct 1995 15:48:12 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4707ns$[e-mail]>
References: <46mnd8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

Hi,

Just a few thoughts: If you plan to go on the sea with the catamaran,
you have the best ground plane  thinkable at your hands. So it would be a
waste not to make use of it (load part of the rigging against the water).
I read about people attaching a metal foil to the outside of the hull to
this end. Surely there will be a solutuin that could be used on your boat.

73, Moritz DL5UH



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!HiWAAY.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (JTriz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help for FM Antenna Kluge
Date: 29 Oct 1995 18:20:50 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <47128i$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JTriz)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Please help!

I need advice from this knowledge bank since I am lacking in such
knowledge on antennas.  I recently picked up a Reveal Radio card for my
PC.  The reception in my area is not the greatest and I'm trying to better
my antenna performance.  What the card came with is a dual conductor that
runs from an 8mm jack on the radio card.  The two conductors split and run
180 degrees apart.  Since my PC is in my basement, that is not enough.

What I've done:  I have unused cable TV cable running from outside my
basement into my attic and down into another room.  My cable system runs
two cables so I have two conductors to use.  I've attached the two
conductors that came with the Radio card to the two center conductors of
the cables running into the attic.  I pulled the cable into the attic and
stripped the outer shields of the cables so just the center conductors are
exposed.  The two conductors are horizontal and 180 degrees apart.

This seems to have worked somewhat but is there a way to increase the
performance of this system?  Any help would surely be appreciated!  Thanks
in advance!

Jason Trizna


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:49 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 19:50:44 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

 [e-mail] (Bill Turner) wrote:

>It'll work, but like all verticals close to the ground and without a
>highly conductive ground extending out several wavelengths, efficiency
>will be poor.

I thought this was only a significant problem with 1/4 wave verticals,
where half the antenna current is in the ground plane?  A 1/2 wave
center-fed vertical doesn't work that way.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:51 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cais.net!zippy.cais.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: DISCONE in 73 Mag, anyone try it ????
Date: 29 Oct 1995 21:56:49 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <470tb1$[e-mail]>
References: <46oai3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.252.17.112
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>  In article <46mg53$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>  (DedElvis01) writes:
>
>  >
>  >I just saw the discone antenna in last months issue of 73 and was
>  >wondering if anyone has tried it ????
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
>  There have been some other postings several weeks ago. It apparently has
>  problems according to people that have tried to build it. The theory looks
>  flawed also>isn't that the one that grounds the skirt wires at the open
>  ends? If so, that's a no no!
>  73 Tom
>
>>>>
If there is anything that antenna is not IT IS A DISCONE. How the editor(?) could let such a
technically screwed up article into print in beyond me. I started to write the mag but
decided if they could not recognize technical garbage when they read it I was probably not
the one to educate them.

The antenna resembeles a broad dipole that will give you a broader bandwidth than just
two single wires.

Go the the ARRL Antenna Hand Book and get the design data for a discone and don't
waste your time on the article.

73/Jim/AC4CZ


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:51 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cais.net!zippy.cais.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: DISCONE in 73 Mag, anyone try it ????
Date: 29 Oct 1995 22:06:10 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <470tsi$[e-mail]>
References: <46oai3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.252.17.112
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>  In article <46mg53$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>  (DedElvis01) writes:
>
>  >
>  >I just saw the discone antenna in last months issue of 73 and was
>  >wondering if anyone has tried it ????
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
>  There have been some other postings several weeks ago. It apparently has
>  problems according to people that have tried to build it. The theory looks
>  flawed also>isn't that the one that grounds the skirt wires at the open
>  ends? If so, that's a no no!
>  73 Tom
>
>>>>


The antenna described in the article - is not a discone.  How the tech editor could let that
collection of mis-information get into print is beyond me.  Go to the ARRL Antenna Manual
and get the correct tech data you need.  Never mind 73 mag - that data is all wrong.

73/Jim/AC4CZ


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:52 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cais.net!zippy.cais.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1:4 Balun ?
Date: 29 Oct 1995 22:11:06 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <470u5q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.252.17.112
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (charles copeland) writes:
>  I have seen 1:1 and 1:4 baluns in magazines. I understand a balun
>  can reduce TVI, but don't understand the ratios.
>
>  I could make a will guess and say 1:4 is for 1/4 wave dipoles ???
>
>  What are the different ratios for?
>
>
>>>>
The 1:4 and 1:1 are ratios to match the feed line impedance to the antenna impedance.  It
has nothing to to with 1/4 wave dipoles. Get a copy of a book by Walt Maxwell called
Reflections that is published by ARRL for the best discussion of the above.

73/Jim/AC4CZ


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:53 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!lamarck.sura.net!fconvx.ncifcrf.gov!mack
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mack)
Subject: Re: 9913 Flexable Enough to Rotators?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center
References: <46fgg3$[e-mail]> <46hdoe$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 23:05:52 GMT
Lines: 23

In article <46hdoe$[e-mail]> Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] (HeadShrnkr) wrote:
>>Hello, I was wondering if anyone had any experience with 9913 in an Oscar
>>system? Is this cable flexable enough to be used in a rotating tracking
>>system that is on 24 hours per day? I currently have RG8 which is flexable
>>enough but the SWR goes through the roof after it has been in use for a
>>few months, it seems the center insulator can not handle the stress. I was
>>considering RG213 or 9913 for replacment, any suggestions?
>>
>
I wouldn't use 9913 for anything that moves, it's much too stiff. THere
are new flexy cables out which are low loss (like 9913) but flex
like 213. There is also stuff used in the commercial world, which I
see at ham fests which is _very_ flexilbe and designed for this sort
of thing. It's narrower than 213 but bumpy (like heliax). It always
is in short lengths (like 1 foot) and has connectors on it. It may be more
lossy/ft than 9913, but for 1 ft who cares and you won't have to climb
the tower every 3 months.

        Joe NA3T
        [e-mail]




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:54 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!usenet
From: "Thomas D. Cox" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help With Old RG-8
Date: 29 Oct 1995 23:29:32 GMT
Organization: IndyNet-Indys Internet Gateway
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <4712os$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.3.70.155
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Bill,

Godd tip on using the analyzer. Thanks.

Tom, KA5NEE/9
[e-mail]



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:55 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!lumkes
From: [e-mail] (John Lumkes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Gain of 2m J-pole vs. dipole?
Date: 29 Oct 1995 23:35:20 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin--Madison
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <47133o$[e-mail]>
References: <47128i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hp-37.cae.wisc.edu

Does the common 2m J-pole exhibit gain as referenced over
a dipole. If so, does it do it by "flattening" out the
pattern in a way to give more horizontal then vertical
power.

Just wondering, thanks.
John Lumkes
[e-mail]
KG9EA



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!msunews!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!ns.saard.net!ntx.City.UniSA.edu.au!levels.unisa.edu.au!vail.levels.unisa.edu.au!news
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Mobile handset's antenna manufacturers?
Message-ID: <471bqe$[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Stanley Lim Hock Hin)
Date: 30 Oct 1995 02:03:58 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: The Digital Comms Group, Uni of SA
NNTP-Posting-Host: wylie.levels.unisa.edu.au
Lines: 9

Hi,

I am urgently looking for mobile handset's antenna manufacturers, any information
provided will be very much appreciated. Thanks.

Stanley
--------
email addr. [e-mail]



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:56 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!chi-news.cic.net!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger A. Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna software for Macintosh
Date: 30 Oct 1995 03:57:46 GMT
Organization: Telex Communications, Inc.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <471ifq$n61$[e-mail]>
References: <46uvob$[e-mail]>

Curt,

There are some versions of NEC available for the
McIntosh.  I have seen them at various FTP sites
including ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC.

Also try ftp.funet.fi.

73,Roger WB0DGF


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:57 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!yuma!lamar.ColoState.EDU!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Watts)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Isotron Ant
Date: 30 Oct 1995 08:04:11 -0700
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <472phb$[e-mail]>
References: <45tp6q$[e-mail]> <45u2vo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lamar.acns.colostate.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Jerry Gardner ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Watts ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : I have the 160m version, and I was able to expand the <2:1SWR
: : bandwidth with a transformer.  I like it!
: Have you been able to make any contacts with it? Any DX contacts?

Not too much, just Japan and Australia, but I don't really try too often.

Follow the directions carefully, a plain old tuner just won't cut it.
galen, KF0YJ


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:58 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Gain of 2m J-pole vs. dipole?
Date: 30 Oct 1995 10:12:35 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <472q13$[e-mail]>
References: <47133o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <47133o$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John
Lumkes) writes:

>Does the common 2m J-pole exhibit gain as referenced over
>a dipole. If so, does it do it by "flattening" out the
>pattern in a way to give more horizontal then vertical
>power.
>
>Just wondering, thanks.
>John Lumkes

Him John,
The J pole is just a stub fed 1/2 wave vertical. The gain and pattern are
identical, assuming each antenna is well constructed and the radiation
centers are the same heights.

A J pole could perform slightly poorer if the stub radiates, or if the
feedline isn't properly decoupled and it radiates. A half wave could do
the same if it's matching network isn't well constructed, or if the
feedline isn't properly decoupled.

73 Tom


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:50:59 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Velocity Factor rg8x
Date: 30 Oct 1995 10:41:34 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <472a4u$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx01-04.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) writes:
;  Roy Lewallen ([e-mail]) wrote:
;
;  : I've found that foamed-dielectric cable velocity factor varies a lot.
;  : I assume it's because they don't have all that good control over the
;  : foam density. If the velocity factor is important to your project, you
;  : probably should measure it.
;
;  I assume they control the diameters of the inner and outer conductors
;  pretty well.  This leads to the conclusion that the cable impedance
;  varies.  I hope this is not generally the case for a given roll of coax,
;  because if the impedance varies by much along the length of the line, it
;  can cause the line to act as a filter.  But even if it's safe to
;  assume that the dielectric of a reel of line is reasonably constant,
;  a direct correlary of Roy's comment would be, "If the impedance is
;  important to your project, you probably should measure it."  (And I do
;  agree you should measure the velocity factor if it's important to you.)

I've measured the impedance of solid dielectric "50 ohm" cables at over 60
ohms, so I don't think you can assume that they control the conductor
diameters, either. (Actually, I'd guess the variable is the dielectric
thickness, unless they're purposefully saving a few bucks by using a
skinnier inner conductor.) Anyway, I sure agree with Tom that if impedance
is important, you've got to measure it, too -- even with solid dielectric
cable.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:00 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: JOE REED <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver Plating Coils
Date: 30 Oct 1995 12:19:47 GMT
Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <472ft3$op9$[e-mail]>
References: <46n4oe$[e-mail]>

I have always used a product called "COOL OHM". It is used by
the power companies to silver plate switch contacts.
Just wet a rag, dip rag into Cool Ohm powder and rub on the
copper. Puts a thin silver coating on the copper. Also since
silver oxide is a conductor you do not worry when it develops a
tarnish.

Joe Reed-K7CJ


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:02 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!newsfeed.acns.nwu.edu!ftpbox!mothost!lmpsbbs!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Karl Beckman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 15:14:52 -0500
Organization: Mot LMPS - Private Data
Lines: 102
Message-ID: <CSLE87-3010951514520001@145.39.1.10>
References: <CSLE87-1710950948330001@145.39.1.10> <46lgag$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 145.39.1.10

In article <46lgag$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
wrote:

> Hi Karl,
> In article <CSLE87-1710950948330001@145.39.1.10>, [e-mail]
> (Karl Beckman) writes:
> >      (SNIP)
> >
>
> Those mixing products are over a hundred dB down according to Zach
> reference. I can't imagine this causing a problem unless you are duplexing
> a few transmitters and a receiver all on one antenna. You may receive a
> "pink slip" unwanted emissions are less than 40 dB (or so) down. A modern
> exciter typically has spurs 50 or so dB down. Seriously now, who really
> cares if the connector adds something -140dB or more down? Let's not alarm
> people needlessly!
>
> In order to produce excessive unwanted signals, the receiver would have to
> be connected to the same antenna along with two or more transmitters. This
> question was for a scanner antenna, not a military multi-TX and RX single
> antenna application!
>
> >Silver or other non-ferrous material should always be used for high power
> >RF connectors unless you and your neighbors (physical, RF, and regulatory)
> >can tolerate the generation of harmonics on any frequency that passes
> >through the connector at a decent power level.
>
> I can't even imagine a problem with a nickle plated connector in an
> amateur installation. Who really cares if it generates IMD products over
> one hundred dB down? FCC type acceptance of 1500 watt amplifiers only
> require spurious emission levels being approximately 45 dB down from the
> 1500 watt output level. Aren't we being a bit alarmist here, implying that
> this will cause trouble with the neighbors?
>
    (SNIP AGAIN)
>
> 73 Tom

Yes, Tom, the products ARE over 100 dB down from carrier, but don't stop
there and assume that they are not significant.  The input sensitivity of
a typical amateur repeater is below 0.5 uv for a decent signal, which is
-143 dBw.  The output power of that repeater is typically 100W, which is
+20 dBw.  The IM product levels are therefore +20 - 100 or -80 dBw.  That
equates to a signal strength of 700 microvolts, or 63 dB above the "decent
signal" at the receiver input.  With the capture ratios of narrowband FM
receivers at 6 dB or less, you tell me how many repeater users in your
area would be able to override the interfering signal.

Your second question was "Who really cares if it generates IMD products
over one hundred dB down?"  Ask the operator of another 2M repeater
located up or down 600 kHz at the same site as the one with one nickel
connector in the antenna feedline.  Or find the owner of a UHF repeater
that operates 2.5 MHz up or down from another, on the same site.  In the
case of UHF this could be a Part 90 public safety or business user or a US
Fed Govt station, it's not limited to just another amateur repeater or
control link.  And, since the IM products are radiated on-channel, it
cannot be filtered out at the victim's receiver input.

Why is this such a big deal?  You can't rely on coax cable shield
attenuation to isolate the IM products because the harmonic currents flow
on both the inside and outside of the braid coming from the nickel-plated
connector.  If the connector happens to be at the top of the tower, it
radiates into all other antennas on the site, and also generates harmonics
and IMD of any other frequencies that illuminate the connector with
near-field RF.

Then Tom asked a third question:
> FCC type acceptance of 1500 watt amplifiers only
> require spurious emission levels being approximately 45 dB down from the
> 1500 watt output level. Aren't we being a bit alarmist here, implying that
> this will cause trouble with the neighbors?

If your neighbor/victim/"bombee" is an FCC monitoring station, or the
White Sands Missile Test Range, or a station belonging to any of the
numerous USGov't, State, or local public safety agencies, it could be a
huge PR and legal problem.  It's not an issue of equipment type
acceptance, the actual type-accepted station itself may be totally in
spec.  It is out of band radiation generated in an accessory (transmission
line connector) which causes harmful interference to other legitimate
users of a different chunk of spectrum.

For example, if the Columbus City PD interfered with local 2M, 220, or 440
MHz amateur repeaters with IM signal products at that same level of -80
dBW, would you accept that interference and say, "Well, 90.209c only
requires '...-43 plus 10 log 10 (mean outputpower in watts) [aka dB below
carrier, or dBc --KB] suppression or -80 decibels, whichever is the lesser
attenuation'," or would you call the Cincinnati FCC Field Office to
complain that CPD was radiating out of band and interfering with your
legitimate SkyWarn activities?  And pleasse note that in a similar vein,
shortwave station WWCR in Nashville was recently forced to vacate a newly
assigned frequency in the vicinity of 3.3 MHz because their sidebands
caused intolerable interference to US military operations five to twenty
kHz away.  The transmitter and entire station were in spec, but WWCR still
had to move, demonstrating once again that you can do everything right and
still be wrong.

--
Karl Beckman, P.E.                <    If our English language is so >
Motorola LMPS.RNSG.Pvt Data       < precise, why do you drive on the >
Schaumburg, IL  /  Parma, OH      < parkway and park on the driveway? >
**   Opinions expressed here do no represent the views of Motorola Inc.   **
Amateur radio WA8NVW                        NavyMARS NNN0VBH @ NOGBN.NOASI


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:03 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help for fm antenna kluge"
Date: 30 Oct 95 15:46:04 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "for" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:04 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with loop antenna articles"
Date: 30 Oct 95 15:46:07 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:05 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with old rg-8 (2 msgs)"
Date: 30 Oct 95 15:46:08 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:06 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 30 Oct 1995 18:29:43 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <4735in$[e-mail]>
References: <465msg$[e-mail]> <46eph8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>In article <465msg$[e-mail]>, Zack Lau <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>I suspect that the light weight of aluminum is a factor
>>that outweighs its higher loss.  Little things add up
>>when you wire up an entire town or city...
>>

>
>A tiny little connector is NOT an entire town or city.
>
>Since the connector is so small, and I^2R losses in the shell so small,
>WHO CARES??? If we can get away with fifty or a hundred feet of lossy
>outer conductor, we can certainly get away with a fraction of an inch of
>it in the connector! Such a fuss over nothing....

True, but you asked me to explain why manufacturers get away with
aluminum jacketed low loss cable.  The original question follows:

>[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:



>2.) The losses in the center conductor are where the current is more

>concentrated, so why is the plating on the large diameter low current

>density shell important? Explain why manufacturers get away with woven

>braid (talk about rough) or aluminum conductors on the outside of some

>very low loss RF cables!

Zack KH6CP/1 [e-mail]




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:07 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!sparky!nlcnews.nlc.state.ne.us!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary McDuffie, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: LMR400 Source?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 18:32:57 GMT
Organization: AG0N's Radio Ranch
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4735gs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.206.239.252
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99b.112

There was recent discussion about the merits of 9913 vs LMR400 cable.  Does
anyone have the supplier info handy for the LMR?  Sorry I didn't write it down
when it passed by here the first few times.  :)

Thanks and 73
 _____                       _____ _____ ___ _____
|   __|___ ___ _ _    ___   |  _  |   __|   |   | |
|  |  | .'|  _| | |  |___|  |     |  |  | | | | | |
|_____|__,|_| |_  |         |__|__|_____|___|_|___|
              |___| [e-mail]



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:08 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: Velocity Factor rg8x
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 18:33:49 GMT
References: <47256c$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 50

W2FOE ([e-mail]) wrote:

: How do you recommend measureing coax?  I've treated it as a matching stub
: for a  50 ohm dummy load and then looked for the frequency which still
: gave a 1 to 1.  However, I've never been sure of just how accurate this
: was.

I'm not Roy, but I'll take a stab at this one.  ;-)   --  I've put shorted
and open stubs on a swept impedance bridge (calibrated into short, open and
50 ohms immediately before the measurement).  What I've found is that it's
very difficult to make a good "open" at the end of a line, but a "short" is
pretty definite.  "Opens" tend to suffer from fringing effects, apparently.
So if you move an "open" stub around during the measurement, you can see
changes in the frequencies at which peaks and nulls occur.

When I accurately record the frequency of the impedance peaks and nulls
of a particular shorted stub (typically I've used between 3 and 10 meter
long pieces of cable, which will have several minima and maxima from
7Mhz on up), then calculate the velocity factor based on each of these,
I find that the velocity factor is frequency-dependent.  If I try to
assume that I've just made an error in the true length of the stub, I
quickly realize that that is exactly equivalent to having changed the
velocity factor--so that doesn't account for the shift.

My conclusion from this is that you should measure the velocity factor at
the intended frequency of use.  The variation isn't great:  it's typically
about 1% change from 10MHz to 200Mhz in the cables I've measured, as I recall.

The SWR measurement thing should be fine.  The one thing I'd note about it
is that if your SWR bridge uses a diode detector and there is (nearly) zero
return power, the return detector will be seeing a very small signal, and
won't be very sensitive to small changes.  It might actually be better to
be operating at a low, but not zero, SWR.  If there is not change in SWR
when you add the stub, you know you have not disturbed the SWR--if you are
quite close to a known odd-quarter-wave length, then you can be pretty
certain that you haven't just changed the phase but kept the SWR the same.
If there is any question at all about that, add a small capacitance across
the node where you connect/disconnect the line and try again.  If it still
doesn't change with connecting/disconnecting the line, then you can be sure
you have an odd-quarter-wave length of line.

: Anyone know of a manufacturer who sells it by the wave length?

;-)


--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!inter.nl.net!waasdorp
From: Coen Waasdorp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ldn99-26.leiden.nl.net
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News at news)
Organization: NL Net
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.06 <V3qIi1cDYF6SVYARD7$C+H0$PN>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 19:38:34 GMT
Lines: 35

In article <[e-mail]>, WB3U <jackl@pinetr
ee.microserve.com> writes
> [e-mail] (Bill Turner) wrote:
>
>>It'll work, but like all verticals close to the ground and without a
>>highly conductive ground extending out several wavelengths, efficiency
>>will be poor.
>
>I thought this was only a significant problem with 1/4 wave verticals,
>where half the antenna current is in the ground plane?  A 1/2 wave
>center-fed vertical doesn't work that way.
>
>73,
>
>Jack  WB3U

Jack,

Being the starter of this thread, I also thought that the ground loss
problem was only relevant with 1/4 wave radials and not so much with 1/2
wave center-fed verticals.

I am now a bit confused on this matter :-(

Reading the positive messages on the R5 and R7 verticals (1/2 wave
verticals) I thought of experimenting with a 1/2 wave vertical on 20
mtrs.

So, what would be better, efficiency wise, a 1/2 vertical or a dipole?

73

--
Coen Waasdorp
PA0COE


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:10 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.nic.surfnet.nl!news.sara.nl!news.pi.net!news
From: "Enno J. Korma" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted L for 160
Date: 30 Oct 1995 21:35:06 GMT
Organization: Planet Internet
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <473gea$[e-mail]>
References: <461qct$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nij28.pi.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Hello,

I have used many inverted L antennas on 160m. Total length was always close to a quarter wave.
The higher the better, but a 40' vertical part would already work. Of course you need a good
grounding system in order to get some signal out. Here the old saying holds: the more copper
in the ground, the more RF in the air !

Bottom line: don't wait till you many different answers on your post, start experimenting now.

73, Enno PA0ERA, [e-mail]



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:11 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Hansen, James K (FL40))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Experience with Hygain TH3 Jr beam?
Date: 31 Oct 95 00:10:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


>I noticed that Hygain is advertizing in QST/CQ a TH3-Jr./Rotor/small tower
>package (for all us Holiday shoppers ... :<) ) for $799.  Does anybody out
>there have a TH3 Jr  specifically or a Hygain beam in general and  care to
>comment on the Hygain equipment?  It's curious that the
>TH3-JR does not show up separately at all in my versions of the HRO and
>AES catalogs so I can't get any technical info on the antennae.
>

I have there TH7DX (Super Thunderbird) mounted on there HD70 tower (70'
crack-up) and Tail Twister rotor.  The antenna is a real performer, even
with the tower down (about 25').  In my opine the Tail Twister is the best
rotator HiGain makes.  I don't recommend the heavier rotator made by them
(called the Ham 4, I think).  I feel it has a design deficiency in it's
brake!  Everything is standing up very well for me in the past 7 years that
I have had it.  My only regret is that even larger tri-band beams have
become available since I got mine.  Size, as in boom length, is everything
(if you have the room).

Jim
WD0DIA
[e-mail]


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:12 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!jwhac4ca.mindspring.com!jwhac4ca
From: [e-mail] (John Huecksteadt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Alt/Az Rotators - Interface/Conrtollers?
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 07:30:42 -0400
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jwhac4ca.mindspring.com
Summary: Any Cheaper Route than Yaesu Controller?
Keywords: rotator alt/az wxfax satellite
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B]

I'm thinking about an alt/az rotator for APT satellite imaging.  While the
cost of a rotator is high enough, the cost of controllers/interfaces is
enough to make one think twice about it.  Does anybody know of a circuit or
alternative to such expensive controllers?  Thanks in advance for your help.


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:13 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!msunews!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.uwa.edu.au!classic.iinet.com.au!hades.omen.com.au!news
From: David Sorrel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: apartment antennas
Date: 31 Oct 1995 07:56:12 GMT
Organization: Omen Computer Services, Perth, Western Australia
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <474kqs$[e-mail]>
References: <46scpa$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vk6vw.omen.com.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (jim pestell) wrote:
>I have been reading the mail in this group for the last 6 months or so
>and can't help but notice all the talk about small antennas for mobile
>homes and apartments, I have been using one type or another small
>antenna for years and have built lots of them, from the so called
>magnetic loop to the pancake, all work will, some a little better than
>others.
>Since I am not working at the time I was thinking of writting a book
>on how to build these antennas, but am not sure just who would buy one
>from me.
>I think a fair price would be about $10 and that would include
>postage.
>So if any one out there would be interested in this please let me know
>and if I get enough responce I will go ahead and start writting.
>Thank you.
>

I would probably be intersted in a book based on practical ideas.  And
$10 sound reasonable. (I know it doesn't include postage to Australia but
I will be back in the US next spring and I do have a US address).

David, VK6VW




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:14 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!news
From: ted <ted>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2.4Ghz dish...??
Date: 31 Oct 1995 11:51:16 GMT
Organization: University of Queensland
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <4752jk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: t26.dialup.peg.apc.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; Linux 1.0 i486)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

.. what I think is along the lines of the 'Bob Myers Mode S dish', can't be
sure as I've only seen a small photo of one in a magazine, but...

In 'Electronics World + Wireless World' (August issue) there appeared an
article by John Cronk on a 24cm 'high performance' antenna. Essentially, this
was a parabolic reflector (in the X plane, flat in the Y plane) fed via a
dipole/reflector combination from the parabolic focal point.

The article wasn't too specific on theory but showed practical test results
by the author with a horizontal plot of the antenna. It shows a very wide
horizontal beamwidth (which would seem intuitive, given the shape of the
reflector) and for the size of the reflector (60in x 12in) approx. 17dbi.
Again, this would appear to be consistent with typical gain on 24cm by this
'type' of antenna ie parabolic reflector type.

I'm interested to know of anyones experiences in building a reflector of this
type and with the intention of feeding it with a small helical element...
Although I've not had the opportunity to see a Myers dish up close, certainly
the photo in 73 last month indicates that this is of the same design...

It would seem that building 'half parabolic' reflectors must be simpler than
a full blown dish reflector, and if loss in gain is not too much then
probably a good substitute for the homebrewer...

73 Ted VK1BL

[e-mail]



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:15 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Analysis Program and 100+ Elements 2m Beam
Date: 31 Oct 1995 11:53:59 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4752on$[e-mail]>
References: <474h07$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>I'm looking for a good beam antenna analysis program under DOS or Win
>3.x. If you can give me some filenames and FTP sites... Also I've heard
>of a 100+ elements 2m beam made with two ropes and x number of elements,
>anyone have such a beam diagram?

Well, the  progam to go for, is NEC-2. You can FTP it, but you will find
it quite difficult to use.

There are a few things to watch, if you want to design such a beast:
Antennas about 20 wavelength are being used on 23 cm. However if you
use a "homogeneous" yagi, the gain saturates with boom length and you will
not get anything from your effort. There was extensive work by DL6WU
(made known in the US by K1FO, see newer ARRL Handbook) on a "inhomogenous"
Yagi with a slight taper in element lengths and spacings. Thus you get
about 2.5 dB per doubled boom length, making it a total of about 20 dBD
for an antenna of 100 elememts (50 meters long.) BTW, you would not really
need to simulate the beast, just take the DL6WU / K1FO design and add
elements to suit your space (as I said, the design gives a formula for
any length above 2 wavelengths).

73, Moritz DL5UH




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:16 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Silver vs. Nickel: Why?
Date: 31 Oct 1995 12:22:35 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 78
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <475m0r$[e-mail]>
References: <CSLE87-3010951514520001@145.39.1.10>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Karl,
All of this of course ignores the original question. For a 800 MHz scanner
antenna the connector choice makes no difference at all as related to
these comments.

In article <CSLE87-3010951514520001@145.39.1.10>, [e-mail]
(Karl Beckman) writes:
>Yes, Tom, the products ARE over 100 dB down from carrier, but don't stop
>there and assume that they are not significant.  The input sensitivity of
>a typical amateur repeater is below 0.5 uv for a decent signal, which is
>-143 dBw.  The output power of that repeater is typically 100W, which is
>+20 dBw.  The IM product levels are therefore +20 - 100 or -80 dBw.  That
>equates to a signal strength of 700 microvolts, or 63 dB above the
"decent
>signal" at the receiver input.  With the capture ratios of narrowband FM
>receivers at 6 dB or less, you tell me how many repeater users in your
>area would be able to override the interfering signal.

Karl, Where are the path losses in this analysis? You obviously assume the
receiver and both 100 watt transmitters share a common antenna connector.
There were a lot of losses ignored here such as: If the transmitters are
on separate antennas, what does the mixer do? Does it follow a square law
relationship or is it linear?

>Your second question was "Who really cares if it generates IMD products
>over one hundred dB down?"  Ask the operator of another 2M repeater
>located up or down 600 kHz at the same site as the one with one nickel
>connector in the antenna feedline.  Or find the owner of a UHF repeater
>that operates 2.5 MHz up or down from another, on the same site.  In the
>case of UHF this could be a Part 90 public safety or business user or a
US
>Fed Govt station, it's not limited to just another amateur repeater or
>control link.  And, since the IM products are radiated on-channel, it
>cannot be filtered out at the victim's receiver input.
>
Fifteen years ago I owned a Two-way, BC and Marine radio service and sales
business. In hundreds of service contracts spanning the Great Lakes area,
we never saw real world communications system intermod problems caused by
nickle-plated connectors. I also do not recall very many two-way sites
(omni antenna, urban area) quiet enough to allow a .5 uV signal to be
considered a "decent signal", let alone a "useable signal"!

>Why is this such a big deal?  You can't rely on coax cable shield
>attenuation to isolate the IM products because the harmonic currents flow
>on both the inside and outside of the braid coming from the nickel-plated
>connector.

I don't understand how they get on the outside, could you explain that?

>If the connector happens to be at the top of the tower, it
>radiates into all other antennas on the site, and also generates
harmonics
>and IMD of any other frequencies that illuminate the connector with
>near-field RF.
>
Again, where are the path losses? And who in their right mind *EVER* puts
two transmitters with an IMD product that falls in a local receiver's
passband at the same site? Anyone with any experience would never dream of
doing that!

Even if two transmitters were improperly co-located, the connectors would
be the least of the site managers worries. More important would be the
unpredictable mixing in other active and passive devices!!!  If you think
he plating effects are a concern, wait 'til you experience what a PN
junction will do! As a matter of fact, most of my receivers have PN
junction type mixers, rather than the new nickel plated devices! ;-)

>Then Tom asked a third question:
>> FCC type acceptance of 1500 watt amplifiers only
>> require spurious emission levels being approximately 45 dB down from
the
>> 1500 watt output level. Aren't we being a bit alarmist here, implying
that
>> this will cause trouble with the neighbors?
>
>If your neighbor/victim/"bombee" is an FCC monitoring station, or the
>>snip<<  It's not an issue of equipment type
>acceptance, the actual type-accepted station itself ma


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:17 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!usenet
From: "Gregory J. Buhyoff" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: M-squared 6 mtr SQLOOP?
Date: 31 Oct 1995 13:11:34 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4757a6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.173.78.57
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

I am interested in the M2 6 mtr SQLOOP for genral omnidirectional "hearing".  I have
a beam for DX work but want to use the SQLOOP for "listening around".  Has anyone
used this antenna?  What do you think?  I assume that since it is a loop that it
does not need a ground plane.  I want to use on a mast at about 25 ft.  I appreciate
your comments here or sent to me at [e-mail].  Thanks.

Greg KN4FR




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:18 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!baan.nl!jmaas
From: [e-mail] (Johan Maas)
Subject:  Induction of a wire
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 15:12:32 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: daly.baan.nl
Organization: Baan International b.v.
Keywords: induction
Lines: 19

Hello All,

When i have a wire the induction is +/- 1.2uH/m.

When i have an vertical antenna (1/4 wave) for 80 meters.

And i want to decrease the length to 7.5 meters! The 12.5 meters i missesd
can i make an coil of it of 15uH ????

How is this working!

The impedance in the feeding point is still the same?

Please when you have experience let me share it!


73
from johan PA3GSB



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:19 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!hodes.com!netcomsv!uu4news.netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!ghiscox
From: "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Antenna Analysis Program and 100+ Elements 2m Beam
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <474h07$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 17:12:49 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Lines: 22

Dave Cloutier <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Also I've heard
>of a 100+ elements 2m beam made with two ropes and x number of elements,
>anyone have such a beam diagram?
>
>Thank you
>
>Dave Cloutier
>[e-mail]
>

The article by N6JF appeared in the March '95 QST.

73/George

--
| George L. Hiscox                 | Very funny Scotty... Now |
| [e-mail]               | beam down my clothes !!! |
| WA6RIK @ WB6YMH.#socal.ca.usa.na | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:20 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!connix.com!news
From: pete brunelli <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Broadband Transformer Cores? Help!
Date: 31 Oct 1995 17:37:15 GMT
Organization: Connix - The Connecticut Internet Exchange
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <475msb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pcb.connix.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)


I have been playing with the WA2WVL Broadband Transmitting Wire from November 1995 QST, and am
looking for some feedback on the use of powdered iron cores in place of ferrites.  The ARRL
antenna book treats longwire antennas well, but has some very general info regarding transformers.
My main objective is to wind a broadband 9:1 transformer on a 200 size powdered iron core.  The
ft-240-61 is $12.40 and i have one of 'em.  I also have 2 t-200-? iron cores, all from Palomar.

I have gleaned that i am probably looking at more trifilar windings in a similar configuration.
My choices are: Buy another ft-240-61; buy jerry sevick's book; guess; or post this plea for
assistance.

thanks

p.s. the entire ferrite core experimenters kit from palomar is $18, so it is a good deal compared
to $12.40 for just the big 'un.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Brunelli                             Amateur Call N1QDQ
             Check out http://www.connix.com/~pcb
            Home of the Rolling Thunder Contest Club
               Mobileering for a Better Tomorrow
------------------------------------------------------------------




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:21 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!night.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: Induction of a wire
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 17:44:30 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 31

Johan Maas ([e-mail]) wrote:

: When i have a wire the induction is +/- 1.2uH/m.
: When i have an vertical antenna (1/4 wave) for 80 meters.
: And i want to decrease the length to 7.5 meters! The 12.5 meters i missesd
: can i make an coil of it of 15uH ????
: How is this working!
: The impedance in the feeding point is still the same?

The effects of a particular inductance in a vertical radiator depend on
the diameter of the radiator and on the position of the inductor in the
radiator.  I highly recommend an article from Ham Radio magazine:
Joseph M. Boyer, "The Antenna-Transmission Line Analog," April and May,
1977 Ham Radio.  Basically, the further up the radiator you put the
inductance, the more inductance will be required to bring the antenna into
resonance.  Do not expect the feedpoint impedance to stay the same.  At
resonance, of course, the feedpoint will represent pure resistance.
Generally the shorter the radiator, the lower the resistance.  Also, expect
the SWR bandwidth to decrease.  All this is covered with examples and
formulae to calculate your own situation in that article.  (You do need a
good graph or table of the resistive part of the feedpoint impedance to
accompany the article if you want to know the feedpoint resistance.  The
article suggests King, Mimno and Wing, "Transmission Lines, Antennas and
Wave Guides.")

As in the past, I'm willing to make copies of the article available for a
(large) SASE and some additional stamps to cover my photocopy costs...

73, K7ITM




From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:22 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted L for 160
Date: 31 Oct 1995 18:07:45 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <475olh$[e-mail]>
References: <473gea$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx09-41.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   "Enno J. Korma" <[e-mail]> writes:

>. . .

>  Bottom line: don't wait till you many different answers on your post, start experimenting now.

This is, by far, the best advice I've heard in this forum for a long time!

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:23 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (DGoodman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Guy wire/line material?
Date: 31 Oct 1995 18:14:27 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <476akj$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DGoodman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Any recommendations for _non-inductive_ guy wire material?  Sources?

Thanks es 73

Danny
AE9F/6


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:24 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!interactive.net!winternet.com!news.interlog.com!news.dra.com!news.mid.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tcp.co.uk!usenet
From: Steve Lorek <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HRTOL
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 19:10:08 +0000
Organization: Total Connectivity Providers - Internet access for the UK
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: an107.du.pipex.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b1N (Windows; I; 32bit)

Just to update our thousands of visitors in the past few days. The Ham Radio
Today On-Line pages are all ready for the grand opening on November 3rd.
We've got loads of features (reviews, ex-PMR conversions, beginners guides,
news etc.) ready for the day, so be prepared. So you'd better all stay up
until midnight on the night, because that's when it'll be released! That's
00:00 hours on November 3rd! The URL is:

                     http://www.tcp.co.uk/~slorek/

No other site can touch Ham Radio Today On-Line - you won't believe your
eyes when you see it!

--------------------------------------------------
| Steve Lorek    |       [e-mail]        |
--------------------------------------------------
| Editor, Ham Radio Today On-Line, the best      |
| Amateur Radio Web site in the world!!! Visit   |
| it at    http://www.tcp.co.uk/~slorek          |
--------------------------------------------------


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:26 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.uiowa.edu!crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us!SABINW
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RF transformers
Date: 31 Oct 1995 19:40:18 GMT
Organization: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Cedar Rapids, IA,  52401
Lines: 34
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <475u32$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: crpl.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us

Pete Brunelli  N1QDQ asks:
>I have been playing with the WA2WVL Broadband Transmitting Wire from
>November 19 1995 QST, and am looking for some feedback on the use of
>powdered iron cores in place of ferrites.
My suggestions are:
1) The limitation on flux density to prevent overheating of the core
   is about the same for iron and ferrite and tends to be independent
   of permeability (to a first approximation).
2) The May issue of QEX gives a formula and other guidelines to help
   select toroid core cross sectional area to prevent overheating
   (courtesy of Amidon).
3) It is necessary to know the max voltage across *any one* of the windings.
4) Other important numbers are the volts-per-turn and frequency. Note
   also that flux density does not depend on permeability.
5) The idea is to select the core cross section, the number of turns and
   wire size (and therefore the diameter of the core) that will keep the
   magnetic flux density within the suggested limits at the *worst case*
   frequency and also keep copper losses low.
6) Use a wire size that will cover perhaps 80% of the selected core
   perimeter.
7) After these steps are taken the remaining task is to select a
   permeability for the core material. At the lowest frequency the
   reactance of the winding should be perhaps 4 or 5 times the impedance
   of the circuitry that is connected across the winding. Apply the
   standard formula for the inductance of a toroid to determine the
   minimum permeability.
8) Do not use excessively high permeabilities because of their possibly
   greater dielectric and eddy current losses at the higher frequemcies.
9) When the transformer is operating at maximum power, feel it for
   excessive heating. It may be warm to the touch but not hot at 1.5 KW.
10) If a powdered iron core will do the job it is preferred.  Despite the
    comment in part 1), iron flux density ratings are a little higher
    than ferrite, according to some of the literature.



From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:27 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!sun4nl!inter.nl.net!waasdorp
From: Coen Waasdorp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 2 element HF Beam used as vertical, any good?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ldn99-16.leiden.nl.net
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News at news)
Organization: NL Net
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.06 <V3qIi1cDYF6SVYARD7$C+H0$PN>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 20:05:15 GMT
Lines: 49

In article <[e-mail]>, WB3U <jackl@pinetr
ee.microserve.com> writes
>
>At the risk of being nit-picked for saying this, I don't think there
>will be any significant difference in efficiency.  It's the same
>antenna, only oriented differently.

Jack,

I have, in the mean time, looked up the ARRL antenna handbook as you
suggested in your previous posting.

Indeed there are, to simplify the matter, two kind of losses, the ground
return (in case of 1/4 wave verticals) and far field ground losses.

The ground return losses can mostly be solved with a proper radial
system or 1/2 wave vertical (provided the length can be achieved).

The far field ground losses is another matter, and as such not under
control. It seems that where I am located, in a "polder" just below sea
level, the ground conductivity is average to good.

So, the solution is not simple.

Presently I am using a 10-15-20-40 multi band Alpha Delta DX-CC in some
kind of vertical V config (one leg horizontal and the other sloped under
an angle of around 60 dgs, due to the physical environment).

This set-up works to my satisfaction in the NE-E-SE quadrants, but to
the SW-W-NW (central and north America) the performance is less (due to
build up area).

My idea of the vertical was to have something over the roof tops.

So, on one hand I am still considering the vertical, on the other hand
perhaps a rota table dipole would be the answer.

Regretfully a bit expense to try all the solutions!! And I am in bit of a
hurry to be ready for the CQWW CW contest <gr>

Bill, again tks for you info. I have a better understanding of the
various aspects of ground losses.

73


--
Coen Waasdorp
PA0COE


From Unknown Fri Nov 03 11:51:28 1995
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!pagesat.net!niia.net!usenet
From: Rick Rikoski <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rombic antenna questions
Date: 31 Oct 1995 22:42:29 GMT
Organization: Northern Indiana Internet Access, Inc.
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4768ol$[e-mail]>
References: <a117cb$[e-mail]> <467pi2$[e-mail]> <a167cb$[e-mail]> <46jqia$[e-mail]> <46leu8$[e-mail]> <46n1se$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm1-17.niia.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1 (Macintosh; U; 68K)
To: [e-mail]
X-URL: news:46n1se$[e-mail]
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:65525 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:16836

The Rhombic is a great antenna, providing you have the real estate or
providing you want to use it at 100 mHz or higher.

The antenna pattern is squashed vertically which is generally good. It
has a relatively narrow in front and behind the antenna. It can be made
uni-directional by replacing the shorted connection between the two
sides opposite the feed with a 600 ohm resistor.

Its gain is somewhat proportional to the length of the sides. Should be
two wavelengths or greater. It is broadband. Characteristic impedence is
quite high 400-600 ohms, balanced. So you need a balun to feed a coax.

You can stack two rhomboids at a cost of its broadbanded response.