"szilagyic" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Jul 23, 10:42 am, "Smarty" wrote:
Since both antennas cover UHF, point in opposite directions, and are
spaced
within a fraction of a wavelength at UHF frequencies and below, it is
extremely likely that the phase cancellations of the two antennas causes
the
drop in signal strength when mixed in a combiner. The solutions are far
as I
can tell would be to bring both feed lines (coax lines) down to the
receiver
and switch when you need one or the other, or to filter out UHF content
from
the log periodic with a step low pass filter, or separate the 2 antennas
more, since you appear to be creating a phased array even though you
never
intended to by the way you are configuring them. Phased arrays
deliberately
add and subtract RF energy to gain directivity at the expense of
attenuation
in other directions.

Smarty




Thanks for the quick reply. Right now the best alternative is the
spacing as I only have one downfeed that uses a preamp. What would be
the minimum distance between the two antennas that I should use for
UHF considering VHF doesn't appear to be a problem, or is
it better to stack these instead, and if so what would be the minimum
distance that should be used? Or, would a metal barrier between the
two fix this issue with spacing??

I really appreciate the help.
--
Chris


Hi Chris

Is there a reason for not mounting the two antennas "back to back"?
Is there an amplifier at one antenna *before* the combiner? If so, why?

Jerry

On Jul 23, 2:28 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

ps.com...



On Jul 23, 10:42 am, "Smarty" wrote:
Since both antennas cover UHF, point in opposite directions, and are
spaced
within a fraction of a wavelength at UHF frequencies and below, it is
extremely likely that the phase cancellations of the two antennas causes
the
drop in signal strength when mixed in a combiner. The solutions are far
as I
can tell would be to bring both feed lines (coax lines) down to the
receiver
and switch when you need one or the other, or to filter out UHF content
from
the log periodic with a step low pass filter, or separate the 2 antennas
more, since you appear to be creating a phased array even though you
never
intended to by the way you are configuring them. Phased arrays
deliberately
add and subtract RF energy to gain directivity at the expense of
attenuation
in other directions.

Smarty

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now the best alternative is the
spacing as I only have one downfeed that uses a preamp. What would be
the minimum distance between the two antennas that I should use for
UHF considering VHF doesn't appear to be a problem, or is
it better to stack these instead, and if so what would be the minimum
distance that should be used? Or, would a metal barrier between the
two fix this issue with spacing??

I really appreciate the help.
--
Chris

Hi Chris

Is there a reason for not mounting the two antennas "back to back"?
Is there an amplifier at one antenna *before* the combiner? If so, why?

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

It would be difficult for me to mount them back to back based on the
space where they are mounted, but if this would help our situation
then I'd be open to trying it.

There is not an amplifier before the combiner. Basically, I have the
coax feeds running directly from each antenna to the combiner, which
goes to the preamp, which runs down to a splitter, and then to a
couple receivers.

Thank you!
--
Chris

"szilagyic" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 23, 2:28 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

ps.com...



On Jul 23, 10:42 am, "Smarty" wrote:
Since both antennas cover UHF, point in opposite directions, and are
spaced
within a fraction of a wavelength at UHF frequencies and below, it is
extremely likely that the phase cancellations of the two antennas
causes
the
drop in signal strength when mixed in a combiner. The solutions are
far
as I
can tell would be to bring both feed lines (coax lines) down to the
receiver
and switch when you need one or the other, or to filter out UHF
content
from
the log periodic with a step low pass filter, or separate the 2
antennas
more, since you appear to be creating a phased array even though you
never
intended to by the way you are configuring them. Phased arrays
deliberately
add and subtract RF energy to gain directivity at the expense of
attenuation
in other directions.

Smarty

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now the best alternative is the
spacing as I only have one downfeed that uses a preamp. What would be
the minimum distance between the two antennas that I should use for
UHF considering VHF doesn't appear to be a problem, or is
it better to stack these instead, and if so what would be the minimum
distance that should be used? Or, would a metal barrier between the
two fix this issue with spacing??

I really appreciate the help.
--
Chris

Hi Chris

Is there a reason for not mounting the two antennas "back to back"?
Is there an amplifier at one antenna *before* the combiner? If so,
why?

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

It would be difficult for me to mount them back to back based on the
space where they are mounted, but if this would help our situation
then I'd be open to trying it.

There is not an amplifier before the combiner. Basically, I have the
coax feeds running directly from each antenna to the combiner, which
goes to the preamp, which runs down to a splitter, and then to a
couple receivers.

Thank you!
--
Chris


Hi Chris

The best way to mount your two antennas sure would be to locate each in
the region of least sensitivity of the other. That will afford the least
amount of influence of one to the other.

As I understand it, you have an amplifier that is common to both antennas.
You probably have a good reason for doing that. But, why is the amplifier
neded between the antenna and the receiver. It appears that you now have
"one antenna" that is made in two parts. And there is an amplifier
somewhere between the antenna and the receivers.

Jerry

On Jul 23, 4:13 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Jul 23, 2:28 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Jul 23, 10:42 am, "Smarty" wrote:
Since both antennas cover UHF, point in opposite directions, and are
spaced
within a fraction of a wavelength at UHF frequencies and below, it is
extremely likely that the phase cancellations of the two antennas
causes
the
drop in signal strength when mixed in a combiner. The solutions are
far
as I
can tell would be to bring both feed lines (coax lines) down to the
receiver
and switch when you need one or the other, or to filter out UHF
content
from
the log periodic with a step low pass filter, or separate the 2
antennas
more, since you appear to be creating a phased array even though you
never
intended to by the way you are configuring them. Phased arrays
deliberately
add and subtract RF energy to gain directivity at the expense of
attenuation
in other directions.

Smarty

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now the best alternative is the
spacing as I only have one downfeed that uses a preamp. What would be
the minimum distance between the two antennas that I should use for
UHF considering VHF doesn't appear to be a problem, or is
it better to stack these instead, and if so what would be the minimum
distance that should be used? Or, would a metal barrier between the
two fix this issue with spacing??

I really appreciate the help.
--
Chris

Hi Chris

Is there a reason for not mounting the two antennas "back to back"?
Is there an amplifier at one antenna *before* the combiner? If so,
why?

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

It would be difficult for me to mount them back to back based on the
space where they are mounted, but if this would help our situation
then I'd be open to trying it.

There is not an amplifier before the combiner. Basically, I have the
coax feeds running directly from each antenna to the combiner, which
goes to the preamp, which runs down to a splitter, and then to a
couple receivers.

Thank you!
--
Chris

Hi Chris

The best way to mount your two antennas sure would be to locate each in
the region of least sensitivity of the other. That will afford the least
amount of influence of one to the other.

As I understand it, you have an amplifier that is common to both antennas.
You probably have a good reason for doing that. But, why is the amplifier
neded between the antenna and the receiver. It appears that you now have
"one antenna" that is made in two parts. And there is an amplifier
somewhere between the antenna and the receivers.

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

I have the preamp connected to send the signal from the two antennas
down a length of coax and to a 4-way splitter that will supply a few
receivers. When I have everything hooked up except for the second
antenna, it works out well.

What would be your guestimation on how far apart the two antennas
should be, if we put them back to back???

Thank you!!
--
Chris

"szilagyic" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 23, 4:13 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Jul 23, 2:28 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Jul 23, 10:42 am, "Smarty" wrote:
Since both antennas cover UHF, point in opposite directions, and
are
spaced
within a fraction of a wavelength at UHF frequencies and below, it
is
extremely likely that the phase cancellations of the two antennas
causes
the
drop in signal strength when mixed in a combiner. The solutions are
far
as I
can tell would be to bring both feed lines (coax lines) down to the
receiver
and switch when you need one or the other, or to filter out UHF
content
from
the log periodic with a step low pass filter, or separate the 2
antennas
more, since you appear to be creating a phased array even though
you
never
intended to by the way you are configuring them. Phased arrays
deliberately
add and subtract RF energy to gain directivity at the expense of
attenuation
in other directions.

Smarty

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now the best alternative is the
spacing as I only have one downfeed that uses a preamp. What would
be
the minimum distance between the two antennas that I should use for
UHF considering VHF doesn't appear to be a problem, or is
it better to stack these instead, and if so what would be the
minimum
distance that should be used? Or, would a metal barrier between the
two fix this issue with spacing??

I really appreciate the help.
--
Chris

Hi Chris

Is there a reason for not mounting the two antennas "back to back"?
Is there an amplifier at one antenna *before* the combiner? If so,
why?

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

It would be difficult for me to mount them back to back based on the
space where they are mounted, but if this would help our situation
then I'd be open to trying it.

There is not an amplifier before the combiner. Basically, I have the
coax feeds running directly from each antenna to the combiner, which
goes to the preamp, which runs down to a splitter, and then to a
couple receivers.

Thank you!
--
Chris

Hi Chris

The best way to mount your two antennas sure would be to locate each in
the region of least sensitivity of the other. That will afford the
least
amount of influence of one to the other.

As I understand it, you have an amplifier that is common to both
antennas.
You probably have a good reason for doing that. But, why is the
amplifier
neded between the antenna and the receiver. It appears that you now
have
"one antenna" that is made in two parts. And there is an amplifier
somewhere between the antenna and the receivers.

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

I have the preamp connected to send the signal from the two antennas
down a length of coax and to a 4-way splitter that will supply a few
receivers. When I have everything hooked up except for the second
antenna, it works out well.

What would be your guestimation on how far apart the two antennas
should be, if we put them back to back???

Thank you!!
--
Chris

Hi Chris

I am no expert on TV and FM antennas. I do have some experience with
signal splitters and combiners.
It just seems logical that you will get the best antenna performance by
mounting them "back to back" and as far apart as you can without making a
BigJob of it.
As I understand the system connections you are using, both antennas are
being fed from one amplifier thru a signal splitter. That will be as
though you have one antenna thats physically two antennas fed in parallel
with a phase lead or lag dependent on the lengths of their coax. If both
antennas are well matched, the receiver's signal would drop 3 dB when the
second antenna is connected thru that "Signal Splitter", even if the
radiation pattern wasnt effected by that second antenna.

I think you have a very interesting project here. I also think you will
be lucky to solve the "sometimes weak signal" problem using the components
you now have.

How long is the coax and what kind is it?

Jerry

On Jul 23, 8:23 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Jul 23, 4:13 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

roups.com...

On Jul 23, 2:28 pm, "Jerry Martes" wrote:
"szilagyic" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Jul 23, 10:42 am, "Smarty" wrote:
Since both antennas cover UHF, point in opposite directions, and
are
spaced
within a fraction of a wavelength at UHF frequencies and below, it
is
extremely likely that the phase cancellations of the two antennas
causes
the
drop in signal strength when mixed in a combiner. The solutions are
far
as I
can tell would be to bring both feed lines (coax lines) down to the
receiver
and switch when you need one or the other, or to filter out UHF
content
from
the log periodic with a step low pass filter, or separate the 2
antennas
more, since you appear to be creating a phased array even though
you
never
intended to by the way you are configuring them. Phased arrays
deliberately
add and subtract RF energy to gain directivity at the expense of
attenuation
in other directions.

Smarty

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now the best alternative is the
spacing as I only have one downfeed that uses a preamp. What would
be
the minimum distance between the two antennas that I should use for
UHF considering VHF doesn't appear to be a problem, or is
it better to stack these instead, and if so what would be the
minimum
distance that should be used? Or, would a metal barrier between the
two fix this issue with spacing??

I really appreciate the help.
--
Chris

Hi Chris

Is there a reason for not mounting the two antennas "back to back"?
Is there an amplifier at one antenna *before* the combiner? If so,
why?

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

It would be difficult for me to mount them back to back based on the
space where they are mounted, but if this would help our situation
then I'd be open to trying it.

There is not an amplifier before the combiner. Basically, I have the
coax feeds running directly from each antenna to the combiner, which
goes to the preamp, which runs down to a splitter, and then to a
couple receivers.

Thank you!
--
Chris

Hi Chris

The best way to mount your two antennas sure would be to locate each in
the region of least sensitivity of the other. That will afford the
least
amount of influence of one to the other.

As I understand it, you have an amplifier that is common to both
antennas.
You probably have a good reason for doing that. But, why is the
amplifier
neded between the antenna and the receiver. It appears that you now
have
"one antenna" that is made in two parts. And there is an amplifier
somewhere between the antenna and the receivers.

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

I have the preamp connected to send the signal from the two antennas
down a length of coax and to a 4-way splitter that will supply a few
receivers. When I have everything hooked up except for the second
antenna, it works out well.

What would be your guestimation on how far apart the two antennas
should be, if we put them back to back???

Thank you!!
--
Chris

Hi Chris

I am no expert on TV and FM antennas. I do have some experience with
signal splitters and combiners.
It just seems logical that you will get the best antenna performance by
mounting them "back to back" and as far apart as you can without making a
BigJob of it.
As I understand the system connections you are using, both antennas are
being fed from one amplifier thru a signal splitter. That will be as
though you have one antenna thats physically two antennas fed in parallel
with a phase lead or lag dependent on the lengths of their coax. If both
antennas are well matched, the receiver's signal would drop 3 dB when the
second antenna is connected thru that "Signal Splitter", even if the
radiation pattern wasnt effected by that second antenna.

I think you have a very interesting project here. I also think you will
be lucky to solve the "sometimes weak signal" problem using the components
you now have.

How long is the coax and what kind is it?

Jerry

We will see what happens, I'll be sure to post the results. I am
still debating whether I need a better combiner or if they are pretty
universal for quality.

The coax from both antennas to the combiner is 6 ft RG-6, with the
combiner attached to the preamp with a coupler. Then from the preamp
to the 4-way splitter is about 15 ft of RG-6 QS + 20 ft RG-6. From
the 4-way splitter to each device is about 15-20 ft RG-6.

--
Chris

I am no expert on TV and FM antennas. I do have some experience with
signal splitters and combiners.
It just seems logical that you will get the best antenna performance by
mounting them "back to back" and as far apart as you can without making a
BigJob of it.
As I understand the system connections you are using, both antennas
are
being fed from one amplifier thru a signal splitter. That will be as
though you have one antenna thats physically two antennas fed in parallel
with a phase lead or lag dependent on the lengths of their coax. If
both
antennas are well matched, the receiver's signal would drop 3 dB when the
second antenna is connected thru that "Signal Splitter", even if the
radiation pattern wasnt effected by that second antenna.

I think you have a very interesting project here. I also think you
will
be lucky to solve the "sometimes weak signal" problem using the
components
you now have.

How long is the coax and what kind is it?

Jerry

We will see what happens, I'll be sure to post the results. I am
still debating whether I need a better combiner or if they are pretty
universal for quality.

The coax from both antennas to the combiner is 6 ft RG-6, with the
combiner attached to the preamp with a coupler. Then from the preamp
to the 4-way splitter is about 15 ft of RG-6 QS + 20 ft RG-6. From
the 4-way splitter to each device is about 15-20 ft RG-6.

--
Chris

Hi Chris

I'm surprised that the amplifier is needed. But, you have determined that
it does improve reception so I have nothing to add to what you have done.
I do submit to you that the high quality splitter/combiner isnt likely to
provide you with any improvement in TV reception.
When you connect two seperate antennas to one output terminal, like with a
splitter, you then have One Antenna that has two feed points. Mount the
two antennas "back to back", and dont spend too much money on high quality
splitters.

Good luck
Jerry