RadioBanter - Best HF Vertical

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Antenna (https://www.radiobanter.com/antenna/)

- - Best HF Vertical (https://www.radiobanter.com/antenna/116626-best-hf-vertical.html)

Best HF Vertical

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

Best HF Vertical

"west" wrote in message
news:280Kh.1399$Eg4.1163@trnddc03...
I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

IMHO: Take a look at the steppir verticals
http://www.steppir.com/
No traps, coils, capacitors or linear loading of any kind.

Full continuous coverage, including WARC bands-without compromise! 2000 W
PEP Rating.

Used on several DXpeditions with rave reviews

That's the one I would buy if I could put in a good ground radial system -
but I have no room for radials. So don't own one, a friend does and for what
is worth he claims it is the best vertical he has ever owned over 30 years
including, Butternut, Cushcraft, Hustler, Hy-Gain, etc

But the steppir's are pricey $595 and $695

Good luck

CL

Best HF Vertical

On 14 Mar, 18:50, "Caveat Lector" wrote:
"west" wrote in message

news:280Kh.1399$Eg4.1163@trnddc03...

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

IMHO: Take a look at the steppir verticals
http://www.steppir.com/
No traps, coils, capacitors or linear loading of any kind.

Full continuous coverage, including WARC bands-without compromise! 2000 W
PEP Rating.

Used on several DXpeditions with rave reviews

That's the one I would buy if I could put in a good ground radial system -
but I have no room for radials. So don't own one, a friend does and for what
is worth he claims it is the best vertical he has ever owned over 30 years
including, Butternut, Cushcraft, Hustler, Hy-Gain, etc

But the steppir's are pricey $595 and $695

Good luck

CL

A vertical dipole fed in the center
Art

Best HF Vertical

There is such a thing? ;O

Well, my only experience with an HF vertical is the Outbacker on my
truck. Works A-OK on 40M and up, but seems a little weak on 80M (which
doesn't really surprise me!).

Scott
N0EDV

west wrote:

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

Best HF Vertical

west wrote:

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

best is any vertical from Force 12 - I got one on 75 meters that beats
everything else I have put up.
got one on 40 meters from Force 12 - beats everything else I have put up.

need I go on?

Best HF Vertical

In article ,
Jet_Li wrote:

best is any vertical from Force 12 - I got one on 75 meters that beats
everything else I have put up.
got one on 40 meters from Force 12 - beats everything else I have put up.

I went to the Force 12 website and clicked on the "Flagpole antennas"
link http://force12inc.com/F12-flagpole-ants-003.htm.

I read the "New 40 Meter Coil" portion of the page with interest --
sounded too good to be true. A moment's use of the calculator showed
that the VSWR figures and the quoted feed point impedances were very
inconsistent -- orders of magnitude wrong. The claimed SWR of 16 for the
unloaded antenna worked out really to be about 850 -- close enough to
infinity for me!

If that's what the "useful A.R.R.L. TLW software" actually indicates,
then the League should withdraw the software. But somehow I suspect that
the software (which I do not have) doesn't predict what the web page
says it does.

I leave it to someone with a copy of EZNEC to see if an 1/8 wave monople
on 40 metres made out of 2 inch diameter tubing really has an input
impedance of about 5 - j460. That part, at least, sounds reasonable to me

David, ex-W8EZE, who hasn't forgotten the formulas for SWR

--
David Ryeburn

To send e-mail, use "ca" instead of "caz".

Best HF Vertical

David Ryeburn wrote in
:

In article ,
Jet_Li wrote:

best is any vertical from Force 12 - I got one on 75 meters that
beats everything else I have put up.
got one on 40 meters from Force 12 - beats everything else I have put
up.

I went to the Force 12 website and clicked on the "Flagpole antennas"
link http://force12inc.com/F12-flagpole-ants-003.htm.

I read the "New 40 Meter Coil" portion of the page with interest --
sounded too good to be true. A moment's use of the calculator showed
that the VSWR figures and the quoted feed point impedances were very
inconsistent -- orders of magnitude wrong. The claimed SWR of 16 for
the unloaded antenna worked out really to be about 850 -- close enough
to infinity for me!

Your calc is about right (assuming Zo=50+j0).

If that's what the "useful A.R.R.L. TLW software" actually indicates,
then the League should withdraw the software. But somehow I suspect
that the software (which I do not have) doesn't predict what the web
page says it does.

TLW suffers from some of the same issues as tables in the ARRL handbooks,
but I haven't run Force12's numbers on TLW, I will use my own calculator.

I leave it to someone with a copy of EZNEC to see if an 1/8 wave
monople on 40 metres made out of 2 inch diameter tubing really has an
input impedance of about 5 - j460. That part, at least, sounds
reasonable to me

David, I ran an analysis of a 10m "flagpole" as a multiband antenna, and
the feedpoint impedance is around the 5-j460 if you ignore resistive loss
in the ground system. Force12 might not want to include such in the
analysis as it drives much lower efficiency.

If they did achieve a coil of 10uH with Q=600, the additional R is ~0.7
ohms (about 0.6dB loss in the stated scenario), so their new 6-j22 looks
a reasonable development(apart from the fact it also ignores ground
resistance), and I make the VSWR(50) to be 10 rather than their stated 6.

At the end of the day, the VSWR is not of itself the issue, the issue is
what is the line loss and load impedance presented to the ATU, then the
expected tuner loss.

Their estimate of 2dB line loss for 100' is probably realistic, I make
the loss on 100' of RG213 at 7MHz with load 6-j22 to be 2dB ( try it
yourself at http://www.vk1od.net/tl/tllc.php ), and the load seen by the
ATU is a manageable 8+j3.0. The Z into the line is highly dependent on
the line length, but since Force12 give it, lets look at likely tuner
efficiency. Using W9CF's tuner applet with default configuration, ATU
loss might be around 0.7dB.

This whole scenario predicts an antenna that might be quite acceptable to
people with space or covenant issues, 3.3dB of total loss.

But...

What if ground resistance was 10 ohms, efficiency of the antenna and
loading coil would be 5/(10+5+0.7) or 32% (5dB loss). That will help the
line loss though, now with a feed Z of 15.7-j22, loss in the same line is
1dB and input Z is 16+j2. ATU loss might be more like 0.4dB. Total loss
is 5+1+0.4 or 6.4dB.

Although there analysis ignores ground resistance, possibly so as to hide
the efficiency of the loaded radiator, the real situation might only be
3dB worse than they intimate.

Of course, if the coil wasn't as good as they state, the picture is a
little poorer. Similarly, achieving a low ground resistance isn't easy
and the story could be much worse.

Do they have credibility? Perhaps they should have stuck to the QSL card
count method as the quantitative support for the design!

The idea of a flagpole sings when an automatic ATU is placed at its base,
but that doesn't solve the efficiency issue that exists with any Marconi
with low radiation resistance. I wrote an article exploring an unloaded
vertical as a multiband antenna, it is at
http://www.vk1od.net/multibandunload...ical/index.htm and may be of
interest.

Owen

Best HF Vertical

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:08:30 +0000, west wrote:

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

SteppIR. Why use a tuner to match your radio to your antenna, when you can
make your antenna match your radio?

--Teh

Best HF Vertical

"Tehrasha Darkon" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:08:30 +0000, west wrote:

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

SteppIR. Why use a tuner to match your radio to your antenna, when you can
make your antenna match your radio?

--Teh

No Tuner i.e. TransMatch -- The SteppIRT vertical is remotely adjustable
in length, with continuous coverage from 40 meters through 6 meters - and
every frequency in between.

A vertical antenna that is precisely adjustable in length while in the air
solves the coverage problem, and in addition has vastly improved performance
over existing fixed length verticals. The ability to tune the antenna to a
specific frequency results in excellent performance on every band - and this
means the entire band, with very low VSWR. Resonant antennas must be made a
specific length to operate optimally on a given frequency. So, instead of
trying to "trick" the antenna into thinking it is a different length (traps,
coils, etc), why not just change the antenna length? This is what we have
done with the new SteppIR verticals.

http://www.steppir.com/

CL

Best HF Vertical

"Caveat Lector" wrote in
:

"Tehrasha Darkon" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:08:30 +0000, west wrote:

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I
also know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you
will, please indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and
why? Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

SteppIR. Why use a tuner to match your radio to your antenna, when
you can make your antenna match your radio?

--Teh

No Tuner i.e. TransMatch -- The SteppIRT vertical is remotely
adjustable in length, with continuous coverage from 40 meters through
6 meters - and every frequency in between.

A vertical antenna that is precisely adjustable in length while in the
air solves the coverage problem, and in addition has vastly improved
performance over existing fixed length verticals. The ability to tune
the antenna to a specific frequency results in excellent performance
on every band - and this means the entire band, with very low VSWR.
Resonant antennas must be made a specific length to operate optimally
on a given frequency. So, instead of trying to "trick" the antenna
into thinking it is a different length (traps, coils, etc), why not
just change the antenna length? This is what we have done with the new
SteppIR verticals.

This analysis is along the lines of the traditional "resonant antennas
work better" line.

Sure, a marconi antenna that is adjusted to be a physical quarter wave on
the operating frequency has a feedpoint impedance that yields a low VSWR
on the coax, and feedline losses are relatively low, but the equivalent
loss resistance of the ground connection is significant relative to the
radiation resistance. A quarter wave marconi requires an extensive earth
system for good efficiency.

My reading of Cebik's article at http://www.cebik.com/gp/gr.html is that
simple 4 radial installations have 10 ohms or so loss resistance greater
than extensive (128 radial) systems, which themselves aren't zero loss.
The modelled feedpoint R varies from 4 to 18 ohms above the radiation
resistance of a quarter wave over perfect ground, which implies a
feedpoint efficiency of 90% to 66% respectively.

On the other hand, a longer non-resonant radiator (say approaching a half
wave) has higher radiation resistance (relative to the equivalent ground
loss resistance) which more than offsets the loss expected in a matching
network needed to operate the coax at near unity VSWR for low line loss.
Not only might the longer radiator be more efficient, but it well have a
better pattern (eg higher gain at lower angles or radiation).

It isn't clear to me that the Steppir has "vastly improved
performance over existing fixed length verticals" as you put it. With
enough radials, it is about as good as good verticals get, but there are
other good verticals that don't need as extensive a radial system.

Owen

Best HF Vertical

Owen Duffy wrote in
:

....
But...

What if ground resistance was 10 ohms, efficiency of the antenna and
loading coil would be 5/(10+5+0.7) or 32% (5dB loss). That will help
the line loss though, now with a feed Z of 15.7-j22, loss in the same
line is 1dB and input Z is 16+j2. ATU loss might be more like 0.4dB.
Total loss is 5+1+0.4 or 6.4dB.

I didn't want to give the impression that this isn't a significant
improvement over the unloaded vertical on 7MHz.

The Force12 page give an analysis and loosely claims 16dB improvement
over the unloaded antenna, but that is probably based on ignoring ground
resistance again.

Assuming ground resistance of 10 ohms, feedpoint Z would be 15-j460,
ground loss 5dB, line loss 12.2dB, ATU loss ~1.1dB for a total system
loss of 18.3dB.

Improvement from system loss of 18.3dB to 6.4dB is 12dB, a little less
than they might want you to think, but very worthwhile.

Of course results are very sensitive to the ground scenario.

Owen

Best HF Vertical

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:08:30 GMT, "west" wrote:

I know I can go to eham.com but I like the advice on rraa better. I also
know that this question is somewhat subjective, but if you will, please
indulge. :-)
What is flat out the best vertical HF antenna in your opinion and why?
Thanks in advance.

west
AF4GC

What I gather from what I read here and all the publications I can get
my hands on it is a quarter wave radiator over 130 radials that are at
least 1/4 wave long.

That may not hold true if you consider radiators longer than 1/4 wave.
"Best" is a very loose spec.

I am in the throws of constructing what I think is "Best" for me. I
started out with a 28 foot radiator and three twenty five foot
radials. It worked. It works a whole lot better now with a total of 36
radials. 14 are about 70 ft, 16 are about 36 ft, 6 are less than 36
ft.

I will work on a taller and more robust radiator next.

I feed it with a SGC-237 tuner. I can only guess the tuner losses are
similar to what a comparable tuner built from the TLW program in the
ARRL Antenna Handbook predict.

The limiting factors are the radiator, the ground and the losses.

What is "Best" for you will depend on your set of compromises.

My expectations are focused on 160-80-40 meters. It was pretty
inexpensive until I added the tuner!

John Ferrell W8CCW
"Life is easier if you learn to
plow around the stumps"

Best HF Vertical

The Force12 page give an analysis and loosely claims 16dB improvement
over the unloaded antenna, but that is probably based on ignoring ground
resistance again.

Force 12 advertising has been ignoring the laws of physics since they
first went into business and started their fantasy gain baloney...
Now, that is not to take away from Tom's innovative approach to beam
design and beam construction... He has done some nice things...

denny / k8do