Thread: Trap dipole
View Single Post
  #2   Report Post  
Old August 8th 03, 01:03 AM
funkbastler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 21:59:37 GMT, "Bill"
wrote:

Anybody tried to build this trap antenna yet?

http://www.nerc.com/~jdegood/coaxtrap/
http://members.shaw.ca/ve6yp/
http://members.fortunecity.com/xe1bef/hf-antennas.htm

Need some help on where to tune the traps for the bands of operation, and
pruning the connection wiring. Can this be done with out a major test
equipment investment?


I love those coax traps. About 20 years ago, I spent several hours
with a sweep generator and scalar network analyzer building a set
of traps for 40/20/15/10 meters. Then, I spent almost all day putting
up the antenna. The process is basically "put up one section, check
swr, drop antenna, trim antenna, raise it back up, and repeat until
the SWR is acceptable" (typical dipole scenario). Then, however, you
add a set of traps and the next section, and repeat the entire process
for the next lower (in frequency) band. Keep repeating till you have
all bands covered. Got a nice sunburn and a decent antenna out of the
deal.

The traps can be fairly light weight and compact - I used RG-174 and
wound 'em on empty pill bottles. For test equipment, a plain signal
generator and oscilloscope will suffice, or maybe even just a grid-dip
meter.... Heck - I even got so involved with coax traps that I wrote
a computer program to characterize the things and tell me how many
turns of what kind of coax on what size form would be resonant at
my frequency of interest.

Since that time, I've discovered how pointless it was. Like WB3FUP
suggests, just put up as much wire as you can, as high as you can.
Right now, I'm using a 130 foot inverted L, and it works every bit
as good as the trap dipole did (if not better) from 160 through
10 meters - and it was a *lot* easier to put up. The only drawback
is that you gotta have a tuner.

-fb-