![]() |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
It was a bust. :-(
I used copper pipe -- 1-inch for the bottom quarter-wave element and 1/2-inch for the upper quarter-wave element. The elements are 8 feet, 1 5/8 inches long and at the feed point, the space between the elements is about three inches. I put a piece of thickwall PVC inside the lower element as an insulator (per Cecil's advice) and slid RG-8 through the PVC to the feed point. I attached the coax shield to the 1-inch pipe and the center conductor to the 1/2-inch pipe. This afternoon, a ham pal of mine used his MFJ antenna analyzer (model?) to test the sleeve. The VSWR was never better than 2.8:1 and exceeded 3:1 over much of the intended range of operation. He suggested than we pull the coax out and reconnect it as a more conventional dipole. Good idea. The VSWR dropped to a 1.3:1 best and didn't exceed 1.5:1 over the entire 10m band. As long as I keep the coax a few inches from the lower dipole element, everything's fine. Oh ... don't lean it up against the orange tree, either. I think we might have extracted more information with his analyzer had we not been getting close to being in the dark. If the antenna is inductive, feeding it through a cap might pull the VSWR down to 1:1 at best. I know from my J-poles that this is the case -- not sure if it applies to copper pipe dipoles. I have very few ideas for correcting the original sleeve design. Feeding one or both elements through capacitors comes to mind. Resizing would not seem to be appropriate, since the poor VSWR of the sleeve was still better at 10m than anywhere else. 73, "Sal" (really KD6VKW, anxiously awaiting Saturday morning, to present my CSCE's at the local VE session.) |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Sal M. Onella" wrote in message ... It was a bust. :-( I used copper pipe -- 1-inch for the bottom quarter-wave element and 1/2-inch for the upper quarter-wave element. The elements are 8 feet, 1 5/8 inches long and at the feed point, the space between the elements is about three inches. I put a piece of thickwall PVC inside the lower element as an insulator (per Cecil's advice) and slid RG-8 through the PVC to the feed point. I attached the coax shield to the 1-inch pipe and the center conductor to the 1/2-inch pipe. This afternoon, a ham pal of mine used his MFJ antenna analyzer (model?) to test the sleeve. The VSWR was never better than 2.8:1 and exceeded 3:1 over much of the intended range of operation. He suggested than we pull the coax out and reconnect it as a more conventional dipole. Good idea. The VSWR dropped to a 1.3:1 best and didn't exceed 1.5:1 over the entire 10m band. As long as I keep the coax a few inches from the lower dipole element, everything's fine. Oh ... don't lean it up against the orange tree, either. I think we might have extracted more information with his analyzer had we not been getting close to being in the dark. If the antenna is inductive, feeding it through a cap might pull the VSWR down to 1:1 at best. I know from my J-poles that this is the case -- not sure if it applies to copper pipe dipoles. I have very few ideas for correcting the original sleeve design. Feeding one or both elements through capacitors comes to mind. Resizing would not seem to be appropriate, since the poor VSWR of the sleeve was still better at 10m than anywhere else. 73, "Sal" (really KD6VKW, anxiously awaiting Saturday morning, to present my CSCE's at the local VE session.) Ive built a couple of these and from my experience the bottom pipe is not large enough, maybe 2.5 inches using rg58 coax. PVC may not be the best insulator for this either. Styrofoam is very good. Even then the lower section will have to be somewhat shorter than you would expect. Since you are experimenting try some RG58 with your existing antenna and mkae the change from PVC to styrofoam making the changes one at a time so you can see the individual effects. Also sweep the antena to find out its actuall resoant frequency. Jimmie |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
Sal M. Onella wrote:
I have very few ideas for correcting the original sleeve design. What are the resonant frequencies and feedpoint resistances for the two types of feeds? There's no rule that says the antenna must be 50 ohms at resonance. A 2.8:1 SWR could just be an indication that the feedpoint impedance at resonance is 18 + j0 ohms. Did you do anything to choke the common-mode currents on the feedline? If not, those currents can upset the SWR meter reading. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
On Feb 22, 12:16 am, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote: It was a bust. :-( They can be quirky..And the decoupling is pretty critical. I always preferred a base fed half wave for those reasons. You still need to decouple for best performance, but there are no "coax in the way" issues, etc.. I use a simple "gamma loop" feed. IE: single turn coil, and a cap if needed. Sometimes you don't need the cap, but if you do, 30-50 pf is about the usual value for 10m. I make those from a short length of coax.. I'm basically copying the feed system of the usual cushcraft ringos.. BTW, cushcraft sells a 10m ringo if one doesn't want to build one, or have the tubing. MK |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Jimmie D" wrote in message ... snip Ive built a couple of these and from my experience the bottom pipe is not large enough, maybe 2.5 inches using rg58 coax. PVC may not be the best insulator for this either. Styrofoam is very good. Even then the lower section will have to be somewhat shorter than you would expect. Since you are experimenting try some RG58 with your existing antenna and mkae the change from PVC to styrofoam making the changes one at a time so you can see the individual effects. Also sweep the antena to find out its actuall resoant frequency. Jimmie TKS. I will try both of those approaches. BTW, The PVC wasn't chosen for its electrical characteristics. I used it only as a physical separator to prevent arc-over. Styrofoam, eh? The analyzer permitted sweeping, albeit manually. The resonant freq is where it ought to be and it tests OK with the coax out of the lower section. |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message .. . Sal M. Onella wrote: I have very few ideas for correcting the original sleeve design. What are the resonant frequencies and feedpoint resistances for the two types of feeds? I will need to re-borrow my buddy and his analyzer. We just took readings but no notes. (Yes, I know better.) There's no rule that says the antenna must be 50 ohms at resonance. A 2.8:1 SWR could just be an indication that the feedpoint impedance at resonance is 18 + j0 ohms. Agree. However, the venerable Kenwood TS-120 says to keep the VSWR under 1.5:1. So, my first attempt is a bad antenna for the intended purpose. Did you do anything to choke the common-mode currents on the feedline? If not, those currents can upset the SWR meter reading. No. That was careless of me. Four turns of the coax if I remember correctly from an earlier discussion here. Thus, the first attempt may not be a bad antenna but a bad measurement. |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
wrote in message ups.com... On Feb 22, 12:16 am, "Sal M. Onella" wrote: It was a bust. :-( They can be quirky..And the decoupling is pretty critical. I always preferred a base fed half wave for those reasons. You still need to decouple for best performance, but there are no "coax in the way" issues, etc.. I use a simple "gamma loop" feed. IE: single turn coil, and a cap if needed. Sometimes you don't need the cap, but if you do, 30-50 pf is about the usual value for 10m. I make those from a short length of coax.. I'm basically copying the feed system of the usual cushcraft ringos.. BTW, cushcraft sells a 10m ringo if one doesn't want to build one, or have the tubing. I will try decoupling and also try that feed. I have several commercial antennas but I tend toward building them myelf. I learned the hard way about the three types of copper pipe, K, L, & M. Until I got home and hit google.com, I didn't know to shop for the more economical Type M and paid premium $$$ for Type L. I don't want to think what Type K would have cost. "Sal" |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
On Feb 23, 12:40 am, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote: wrote in message ups.com... On Feb 22, 12:16 am, "Sal M. Onella" wrote: It was a bust. :-( They can be quirky..And the decoupling is pretty critical. I always preferred a base fed half wave for those reasons. You still need to decouple for best performance, but there are no "coax in the way" issues, etc.. I use a simple "gamma loop" feed. IE: single turn coil, and a cap if needed. Sometimes you don't need the cap, but if you do, 30-50 pf is about the usual value for 10m. I make those from a short length of coax.. I'm basically copying the feed system of the usual cushcraft ringos.. BTW, cushcraft sells a 10m ringo if one doesn't want to build one, or have the tubing. I will try decoupling and also try that feed. I have several commercial antennas but I tend toward building them myelf. I learned the hard way about the three types of copper pipe, K, L, & M. Until I got home and hit google.com, I didn't know to shop for the more economical Type M and paid premium $$$ for Type L. I don't want to think what Type K would have cost. "Sal"- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Sal, I would like to know how it works with the PVC as I have tried it on exactly this type of antenna and it worked horribly. Apparently the PVC I was using has some really lousy dielectric qualities, This stuff would melt in a microwave while other PVC pipes do not.. I understand that all PVC is not created equally and that some may be OK. To get mine to work I used larger pipe, smaller coax, and a different insulating material but my original was identical to your first attempt. Unfortunately for me I made all the changes at once and really dont know which fixed the problem except that the PVC was an issue. I am very interested in finding whether or not just adding the choke fixed the problem because this is also something I forgot to do on my intial attempt. Second attempt had one of those chokes from "Wireman" made of a length of coax and ferrite beads. One thing that concerned me even after the antenna was working is the the SWR appeared to be a little too good. It was 1.2:1 in the middle of 10 meters and never got ave 1.7:1 even at the band edges. I thought that this is a little too good to be true.. Jimmie |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"JIMMIE" wrote in message oups.com... snip One thing that concerned me even after the antenna was working is the SWR appeared to be a little too good. It was 1.2:1 in the middle of 10 meters and never got ave 1.7:1 even at the band edges. I thought that this is a little too good to be true.. My concern, too, for the same reason but the readings appear to be authentic. For check, I tried the modified antenna (coax not running through the lower element) on a few other bands with very, very low power and got terrible VSWR readings. I get about a 1.4:1 at the low end of the 10 band, dropping to a 1.1:1 near the top of the band. I believe having big, fat elements helps. Due to cable loss, my measured VSWR at the transceiver is a skosh better than what I would see at the antenna. A nice chart in the ARRL Antenna Book shows that with 1 dB cable loss (approximate for 100' of RG-8), my 1.4:1 VSWR measured at the radio is actually closer to 1.6 at the antenna. Still a keeper. I went on the air last night with a few watts and got a great signal report from a local ham, so the antenna is working. "Sal" (KD6VKW /AE) |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
Sal M. Onella wrote:
"JIMMIE" wrote in message oups.com... snip One thing that concerned me even after the antenna was working is the SWR appeared to be a little too good. It was 1.2:1 in the middle of 10 meters and never got ave 1.7:1 even at the band edges. I thought that this is a little too good to be true.. My concern, too, for the same reason but the readings appear to be authentic. For check, I tried the modified antenna (coax not running through the lower element) on a few other bands with very, very low power and got terrible VSWR readings. I get about a 1.4:1 at the low end of the 10 band, dropping to a 1.1:1 near the top of the band. I believe having big, fat elements helps. Due to cable loss, my measured VSWR at the transceiver is a skosh better than what I would see at the antenna. A nice chart in the ARRL Antenna Book shows that with 1 dB cable loss (approximate for 100' of RG-8), my 1.4:1 VSWR measured at the radio is actually closer to 1.6 at the antenna. Still a keeper. I went on the air last night with a few watts and got a great signal report from a local ham, so the antenna is working. "Sal" (KD6VKW /AE) A year or two ago I was into playing with various monopole designs for 10 meters and greater freqs. The bazooka I built and liked was a stainless steel whip for the radiator. The bazooka sleeve was hook to coax and the mast--at the sleeve where the bottom of the radiator was mounted on a teflon block insulator. The sleeve was either 1-1/8 or 1-3/8 copper pipe. The antenna was fed at the top of the sleeve where the radiator exited, with a 1:1 current balun on a toroid core. The balun was able to handle 100+ watts and I drove it at 100 W. The swr was below 1.5:1 on most of the ten meter band, I don't believe it was ever above 2:1, if memory now serves me correct. The antenna was ok. However, a 1/2 monopole with a gamma feed is what I finally settled on and still run today. Benefit is that this antenna requires a minimal counterpoise for excellent performance and radiation pattern and ease of construction. Regards, JS |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"John Smith" wrote in message ... snip However, a 1/2 monopole with a gamma feed is what I finally settled on and still run today. Benefit is that this antenna requires a minimal counterpoise for excellent performance and radiation pattern and ease of construction. Regards, JS I need to learn more aboout matching. I picked up the 1989 edition of ARRL's ANTENNA IMPEDANCE MATCHING at the swap meet a few years ago, but I really haven't taken the time to dig into it. I'm starting to think in terms of Smith charts, which I never thought I would need or use. Surprise! |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
Sal M. Onella wrote:
I'm starting to think in terms of Smith charts, which I never thought I would need or use. Surprise! Carrying a Smith Chart around in your head is a good way to conceptualize transmission line and antenna configurations. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... Sal M. Onella wrote: I'm starting to think in terms of Smith charts, which I never thought I would need or use. Surprise! Carrying a Smith Chart around in your head is a good way to conceptualize transmission line and antenna configurations. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Yes. I have seen a lot of Smith charts for broadband Navy shipboard antennas. The people who match them obviously have to do a chart for the raw antenna in place on the ship, then design and adjust a matching network, followed by a chart of the results, with every point inside the 3:1 (or 4:1) circle. Their efforts are generally documented in the ships' antenna files. I agree about the Smith chart for conceptualizing but at this stage, I am just a Smith baby. Back on topic, I am using the sleeve in a conventional dipole configuration until I can take the time to apply the ideas presented in this NG. I noticed this afternoon that coiling four turns of decoupling loop a few feet from the feed actually raised the VSWR, which I didn't understand. Also, where the coax hangs down next to the antenna makes a difference in the VSWR, so obviously the line is not "flat" and is instead part of the antenna. (Do we still use the term "flat" to describe a transmission line which is properly matched to the load? I recall it from Navy training more than 40 years ago.) My first HF antenna works, but it's clearly no marvel. |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Sal M. Onella" wrote in
: "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... Sal M. Onella wrote: I'm starting to think in terms of Smith charts, which I never thought I would need or use. Surprise! Carrying a Smith Chart around in your head is a good way to conceptualize transmission line and antenna configurations. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Yes. I have seen a lot of Smith charts for broadband Navy shipboard antennas. The people who match them obviously have to do a chart for the raw antenna in place on the ship, then design and adjust a matching network, followed by a chart of the results, with every point inside the 3:1 (or 4:1) circle. Their efforts are generally documented in the ships' antenna files. I agree about the Smith chart for conceptualizing but at this stage, I am just a Smith baby. Back on topic, I am using the sleeve in a conventional dipole configuration until I can take the time to apply the ideas presented in this NG. I noticed this afternoon that coiling four turns of decoupling loop a few feet from the feed actually raised the VSWR, which I didn't understand. Also, where the coax hangs down next to the antenna makes a difference in the VSWR, so obviously the line is not "flat" and is instead part of the antenna. (Do we still use the term "flat" to describe a transmission line which is properly matched to the load? I recall it from Navy training more than 40 years ago.) Yes, I think that the meaning taken for a "flat line" is one with 1:1 or close VSWR, flat to mean the magnitude of the voltage (or current) is approximately constant all all positions on the line, and that describes only what is happening on the inside of the line. That doesn't preclude current flowing on the outside of the line which seems to be your issue. I won't confuse you with examples of where the outside of the line is intended to carry current and at the same time the VSWR is low, but it is possible and sometimes desired. I agree with you that if you change the feedline routing physically, and you see a consequent change in VSWR, that suggests the outside of the feedline carries current and is part of the radiating system, and I don't think that is what you want. My first HF antenna works, but it's clearly no marvel. Look upon it as an opportunity for learning. After all, what would you do if it just worked? Owen |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Owen Duffy" wrote in message ... Look upon it as an opportunity for learning. After all, what would you do if it just worked? Head off to another band, perhaps? Make more and start passing them out? But you're right, of course. I still have three or four suggestions to try for the sleeve. |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Sal M. Onella" wrote in
: Back on topic, I am using the sleeve in a conventional dipole configuration until I can take the time to apply the ideas presented in this NG. I noticed this afternoon that coiling four turns of decoupling loop a few feet from the feed actually raised the VSWR, which I didn't understand. Also, where the coax hangs down next to the antenna makes a difference in the VSWR, so obviously the line is not "flat" and is instead part of the antenna. (Do we still use the term "flat" to describe a transmission line which is properly matched to the load? I recall it from Navy training more than 40 years ago.) My first HF antenna works, but it's clearly no marvel. I just read your first posting. It sounds like you are building what I refer to as a coaxial dipole. The key to success with coaxial dipoles is decoupling the feedline. A common configuration is to place a set of radials, or a quarter wave choke to be effective a quarter wave below the bottom of the dipole lower element... this actually attempts to reduce current below the radials, and uses the quarter wave of feedline above the radials as part of the radiator for a little more gain. IIRC, the ARRL had some suggestions about decoupling a coaxial dipole. Owen |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
Sal M. Onella wrote:
"Owen Duffy" wrote in message ... Look upon it as an opportunity for learning. After all, what would you do if it just worked? Head off to another band, perhaps? Make more and start passing them out? But you're right, of course. I still have three or four suggestions to try for the sleeve. Sal: I thought it might be clear from my previous post, but I see it was rather "cryptic." I DID find that the coax wanted to couple into the antenna and become part of it (the sleeve itself was NOT a sufficient de-coupling device.) I found the 1:1 current balun was absolutely necessary to make the antenna "stable"--remove the sensitivity to location/orientation/length/etc. of the coax feed. JS |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Owen Duffy" wrote in message ... "Sal M. Onella" wrote in : Back on topic, I am using the sleeve in a conventional dipole configuration until I can take the time to apply the ideas presented in this NG. I noticed this afternoon that coiling four turns of decoupling loop a few feet from the feed actually raised the VSWR, which I didn't understand. Also, where the coax hangs down next to the antenna makes a difference in the VSWR, so obviously the line is not "flat" and is instead part of the antenna. (Do we still use the term "flat" to describe a transmission line which is properly matched to the load? I recall it from Navy training more than 40 years ago.) My first HF antenna works, but it's clearly no marvel. I just read your first posting. It sounds like you are building what I refer to as a coaxial dipole. The key to success with coaxial dipoles is decoupling the feedline. A common configuration is to place a set of radials, or a quarter wave choke to be effective a quarter wave below the bottom of the dipole lower element... this actually attempts to reduce current below the radials, and uses the quarter wave of feedline above the radials as part of the radiator for a little more gain. IIRC, the ARRL had some suggestions about decoupling a coaxial dipole. Owen I was thinking it might be interesting to make a ferrite choke that you can slide on the coax to tune the antenna. You might not have to slide the whole choke just a bead or two that you can move a few inches. Jimmie. |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
On Feb 26, 10:23 pm, Owen Duffy wrote:
That doesn't preclude current flowing on the outside of the line which seems to be your issue. I won't confuse you with examples of where the outside of the line is intended to carry current and at the same time the VSWR is low, but it is possible and sometimes desired. Yep, SWR and feedline decoupling are pretty much totally unrelated. It's possible to have a great match, and horrible decoupling from the line. And visa versa.. Or versa versa, or visa visa.. JS ruminated I DID find that the coax wanted to couple into the antenna and become part of it (the sleeve itself was NOT a sufficient de-coupling device.) It's not a decoupling device at all really. It's the lower half of the antenna. A sleeve half wave needs additional sleeves for decoupling. There are quite a few commercial variations that can be looked at. Many were built as heavy duty VHF public service type antennas. The extra decoupling sleeves can be applied to the usual ground planes also. For VHF, etc, I usually prefer using sleeves, cones, radials, etc vs the usual rf choke or beads. MK |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
"Jimmie D" wrote in message ... "Owen Duffy" wrote in message snip The key to success with coaxial dipoles is decoupling the feedline. A common configuration is to place a set of radials, or a quarter wave choke to be effective a quarter wave below the bottom of the dipole lower element... this actually attempts to reduce current below the radials, and uses the quarter wave of feedline above the radials as part of the radiator for a little more gain. IIRC, the ARRL had some suggestions about decoupling a coaxial dipole. Owen I was thinking it might be interesting to make a ferrite choke that you can slide on the coax to tune the antenna. You might not have to slide the whole choke just a bead or two that you can move a few inches. Jimmie. This is worth trying, too and I had thought of it. Too bad I don't what type ferrite material I have (all junk-box recoveries, swap meet, etc). I figured on a low probability of success, but with failure so cheap, quick and easy -- what the heck!. ;-) |
I Built the 10m Sleeve Antenna
Sal M. Onella wrote:
"Jimmie D" wrote in message ... "Owen Duffy" wrote in message snip The key to success with coaxial dipoles is decoupling the feedline. A common configuration is to place a set of radials, or a quarter wave choke to be effective a quarter wave below the bottom of the dipole lower element... this actually attempts to reduce current below the radials, and uses the quarter wave of feedline above the radials as part of the radiator for a little more gain. IIRC, the ARRL had some suggestions about decoupling a coaxial dipole. Owen I was thinking it might be interesting to make a ferrite choke that you can slide on the coax to tune the antenna. You might not have to slide the whole choke just a bead or two that you can move a few inches. Jimmie. This is worth trying, too and I had thought of it. Too bad I don't what type ferrite material I have (all junk-box recoveries, swap meet, etc). I figured on a low probability of success, but with failure so cheap, quick and easy -- what the heck!. ;-) I have pressed material which was not suppose to work, into working. I have used type 26 material effectively at 10 meters and above, meaning 20, 40, 80, 160m. (sucks on 6m though :( ) If there is a will, there is a way. May not be the most efficient--but ya' can make it work! An inductance meter is a crucial tool, but you can get the plans for one on the net which will use your fet-vom or vtvm and get ya' by! JS JS |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:31 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com