On Jul 5, 3:55 pm, Wimpie wrote:
On 5 jul, 18:42, Michael wrote:



I've seen the Lazy H mentioned in many antenna books over the years,
so I decided to try one on 10 meters. According to the ARRL handbook
the Lazy H is two collinear elements stacked on above the other, Each
collinear element is made up of two 1/2 wave elements. I chose to
use 5/8 wave spacing between the top and bottom elements. I connected
the top and bottom elements with 450 ohm 16 gauge stranded ladder line
(window line). After building the antenna I verified connectivity
between the top and bottom right elements and the top and bottom left
elements. I color coded the end insulators on each side so I could
easily see which top and bottom elements were connected to each other.
The antenna book says to connect the 450 ohm ladder line from the
antenna tuner to the middle of the 450 ladder line that connects top
and bottom elements. Ok done. Now I put up the antenna and make sure
the top and bottom elements are in phase. That is both left connected
elements are on the left and both right connected element are on the
right. I also make sure there is no twist in the ladder line
connecting the top and bottom elements. I also checked the other
ends of the 450 ohm ladder line feeding the antenna has connectivity
at the antenna, and the left and right sides of the ladder line do not
have connectivity. The 450 ohm ladder line feeding the antenna is
about 200 feet long.
Now I bring the 450 ohm feedline in to the house, hook it to my
Dentron MT-2000 antenna tuner with the 4:1 balun inside, tune it up,
and it sucks! Both my half wave horizontal dipole and my Solarcon
Max-2000 blow it away on incoming skip even in the preferred direction
of the lazy H. I rechecked my connections and the lengths of the
elements and spacing and they are correct. I did take in to account
the velocity factor of the 450 ladder line that connects the top
elements to the bottom elements. The antenna book says the length of
the 450 ladder lien between the antenna and the antenna tuner can e
any lenght.
The bottom element is at least 1/2 wave of the ground, and the top
element is 5/8ths wave above that. What did I do wrong?

Michael

Hi Michael,

Normally spoken the feedline between top to bottom elements is
0.5lambda long, without twist, feeding in the middle. The path from
feedpoint to end of the radiation elements is 0.75 lambda, giving an
almost real low input impedance (on order of 30 Ohms, depending on
thickness of radiating elements). In fact you have two full wave
dipoles fed in phase that give most radiation (ground ignored)
perpendicular to the array (bidirectional). There is a vertical null

Why choosing 5/8 lambda vertical element spacing? You create a
vertical lobe and a null in the elevation radiation pattern under
about 53 degrees. You also get a strong reactive input impedance, but
this may not be a problem with the ladder line.

Did you do some indicative field strength measurements (diode
detector) to find out whether it (and the elements) do(es) radiate
(comparing to the other antennas)? It may also reveal some hidden
things.

Maybe somebody knows a loss figure for your ladder line (at 28 MHz) to
assess the losses in the line (200ft part) because of bad VSWR.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJSwww.tetech.nl
When you remove abc, the mail does work.

Hi Wim,
According to the ARRL handbook the highest gain is achieve with a
5/8ths wave spacing between the upper and lower elements. The
handbook gives the following figures for estimated gain.

3/8 wave spacing = 4.4 dbd
1/2 wave spacing = 5.9 dbd
5/8 wave spacing = 6.7 dbd
3/4 wave spacing = 6.6 dbd

EZNEC shows a similar gain peak with a 5/8th wave spacing between the
top and bottom elements.

It seems to works on 14 MHz (stacked dipoles at 14 MHz), but on 10
meters the single 10 meter dipole blows it away.

On Jul 5, 5:32 pm, Michael wrote:
On Jul 5, 3:55 pm, Wimpie wrote:



On 5 jul, 18:42, Michael wrote:

I've seen the Lazy H mentioned in many antenna books over the years,
so I decided to try one on 10 meters. According to the ARRL handbook
the Lazy H is two collinear elements stacked on above the other, Each
collinear element is made up of two 1/2 wave elements. I chose to
use 5/8 wave spacing between the top and bottom elements. I connected
the top and bottom elements with 450 ohm 16 gauge stranded ladder line
(window line). After building the antenna I verified connectivity
between the top and bottom right elements and the top and bottom left
elements. I color coded the end insulators on each side so I could
easily see which top and bottom elements were connected to each other.
The antenna book says to connect the 450 ohm ladder line from the
antenna tuner to the middle of the 450 ladder line that connects top
and bottom elements. Ok done. Now I put up the antenna and make sure
the top and bottom elements are in phase. That is both left connected
elements are on the left and both right connected element are on the
right. I also make sure there is no twist in the ladder line
connecting the top and bottom elements. I also checked the other
ends of the 450 ohm ladder line feeding the antenna has connectivity
at the antenna, and the left and right sides of the ladder line do not
have connectivity. The 450 ohm ladder line feeding the antenna is
about 200 feet long.
Now I bring the 450 ohm feedline in to the house, hook it to my
Dentron MT-2000 antenna tuner with the 4:1 balun inside, tune it up,
and it sucks! Both my half wave horizontal dipole and my Solarcon
Max-2000 blow it away on incoming skip even in the preferred direction
of the lazy H. I rechecked my connections and the lengths of the
elements and spacing and they are correct. I did take in to account
the velocity factor of the 450 ladder line that connects the top
elements to the bottom elements. The antenna book says the length of
the 450 ladder lien between the antenna and the antenna tuner can e
any lenght.
The bottom element is at least 1/2 wave of the ground, and the top
element is 5/8ths wave above that. What did I do wrong?

Michael

Hi Michael,

Normally spoken the feedline between top to bottom elements is
0.5lambda long, without twist, feeding in the middle. The path from
feedpoint to end of the radiation elements is 0.75 lambda, giving an
almost real low input impedance (on order of 30 Ohms, depending on
thickness of radiating elements). In fact you have two full wave
dipoles fed in phase that give most radiation (ground ignored)
perpendicular to the array (bidirectional). There is a vertical null

Why choosing 5/8 lambda vertical element spacing? You create a
vertical lobe and a null in the elevation radiation pattern under
about 53 degrees. You also get a strong reactive input impedance, but
this may not be a problem with the ladder line.

Did you do some indicative field strength measurements (diode
detector) to find out whether it (and the elements) do(es) radiate
(comparing to the other antennas)? It may also reveal some hidden
things.

Maybe somebody knows a loss figure for your ladder line (at 28 MHz) to
assess the losses in the line (200ft part) because of bad VSWR.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJSwww.tetech.nl
When you remove abc, the mail does work.

Hi Wim,
According to the ARRL handbook the highest gain is achieve with a
5/8ths wave spacing between the upper and lower elements. The
handbook gives the following figures for estimated gain.

3/8 wave spacing = 4.4 dbd
1/2 wave spacing = 5.9 dbd
5/8 wave spacing = 6.7 dbd
3/4 wave spacing = 6.6 dbd

EZNEC shows a similar gain peak with a 5/8th wave spacing between the
top and bottom elements.

It seems to works on 14 MHz (stacked dipoles at 14 MHz), but on 10
meters the single 10 meter dipole blows it away.

Well I tried reducing the spacing between the top and bottom elements
to 1/2 wave spacing, but it still did not seem to make any
difference.

I've noticed in the past when working with ladder line that tuning an
antenna with an antenna tuner from about 14 MHz and down brings up the
receive verses by-passing the tuner completely, but that never seems
to happen once you reach 10 meters. I wonder if that has something to
do with it.

I'm not sure, but if the Lazy H has Horizontal polarity and the folks you're
trying to communicate with are using Verticals, there may be quite a bit of
signal loss.
Since you mentioned it was for 11 meters, can we assume you're trying to
communicate without using 'skip'?

On Jul 5, 10:44 pm, "Hal Rosser" wrote:
I'm not sure, but if the Lazy H has Horizontal polarity and the folks you're
trying to communicate with are using Verticals, there may be quite a bit of
signal loss.
Since you mentioned it was for 11 meters, can we assume you're trying to
communicate without using 'skip'?

It meant for skip. I mean to type 10 meters. Old habits die hard as
I started on the CB band.

..

Michael wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:44 pm, "Hal Rosser" wrote:
I'm not sure, but if the Lazy H has Horizontal polarity and the folks you're
trying to communicate with are using Verticals, there may be quite a bit of
signal loss.
Since you mentioned it was for 11 meters, can we assume you're trying to
communicate without using 'skip'?

It meant for skip. I mean to type 10 meters. Old habits die hard as
I started on the CB band.

.

In my area, San Joaquin Valley, Ca--most 10m is on verticals ... while
the guys running the "one size fits all" antennas--or, 80-10m (or, even
160-10m!) are mostly horiz--since a 10m is so easy, they slap up a 10m
vertical also.

The "myth" that most noise is vertically polarized--well, I never
subscribed to that (but, when I was a kid, I first believed it!) Most
runs off above ground power-lines are even, somewhere, around a 45
degree angle (and, above ground power-lines are ALWAYS horiz polarized!
Drive around and look, maybe they do it different in your area ... ???

And, now, most power-lines have went under-ground in my area ...
vertical is fine with me and I don't send my signal skyward or into the
ground, where it may reflect into the stratosphere anyway ...

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
Michael wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:44 pm, "Hal Rosser" wrote:
I'm not sure, but if the Lazy H has Horizontal polarity and the folks
you're
trying to communicate with are using Verticals, there may be quite a
bit of
signal loss.
Since you mentioned it was for 11 meters, can we assume you're trying to
communicate without using 'skip'?

It meant for skip. I mean to type 10 meters. Old habits die hard as
I started on the CB band.

.

In my area, San Joaquin Valley, Ca--most 10m is on verticals ... while
the guys running the "one size fits all" antennas--or, 80-10m (or, even
160-10m!) are mostly horiz--since a 10m is so easy, they slap up a 10m
vertical also.

The "myth" that most noise is vertically polarized--well, I never
subscribed to that (but, when I was a kid, I first believed it!) Most
runs off above ground power-lines are even, somewhere, around a 45
degree angle (and, above ground power-lines are ALWAYS horiz polarized!
Drive around and look, maybe they do it different in your area ... ???

And, now, most power-lines have went under-ground in my area ...
vertical is fine with me and I don't send my signal skyward or into the
ground, where it may reflect into the stratosphere anyway ...

Regards,
JS

And, I almost forgot, ever attempt to get a horiz 20m+ ant on a mobile?
(I haven't!)

Regards,
JS

On Jul 5, 10:44 pm, "Hal Rosser" wrote:
I'm not sure, but if the Lazy H has Horizontal polarity and the folks you're
trying to communicate with are using Verticals, there may be quite a bit of
signal loss.
Since you mentioned it was for 11 meters, can we assume you're trying to
communicate without using 'skip'?

It is meant for skip. I typed 10 meters at the start of the message,
but 11 meters in the Subject line. Old habits die hard as I started
on the CB band.

On 6 jul, 05:01, Michael wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:44 pm, "Hal Rosser" wrote:

I'm not sure, but if the Lazy H has Horizontal polarity and the folks you're
trying to communicate with are using Verticals, there may be quite a bit of
signal loss.
Since you mentioned it was for 11 meters, can we assume you're trying to
communicate without using 'skip'?

It is meant for skip. I typed 10 meters at the start of the message,
but 11 meters in the Subject line. Old habits die hard as I started
on the CB band.

Hello Michael,

You mentioned that even your hor. dipole blows away the Lazy H (also
for good orientation). This rules out every influence because of
minimum elevation angle of main beam versus ground conductivity/
permittivity.

I assume that you are talking about several S-points. There must be
something really wrong. The dipole close to ground will have some
different impedance (then the upper). This will cause some phase
error, but this should not lead to a drastic reduction of overall
gain.

According to your postings, the construction is OK (no twist, feeding
in the middle). I also assume that you have some spacing between the
5/8 lambda long vertical line and the actual feed line (of 200ft), to
avoid coupling between the two.

It can be the line, or the tuner/balun. Line Losses increase and when
your VSWR in the line is very high, this may increase the overall loss
in your 450 Ohm feed line. If possible compare the field strength of
your hor. dipole with field strength of the lazy H.

Other option is to find an unused frequency en put in lots of power
and look for temperature increase.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
The mail does function when you remove abc

Michael wrote:
According to the ARRL handbook the highest gain is achieve with a
5/8ths wave spacing between the upper and lower elements. The
handbook gives the following figures for estimated gain.

3/8 wave spacing = 4.4 dbd
1/2 wave spacing = 5.9 dbd
5/8 wave spacing = 6.7 dbd
3/4 wave spacing = 6.6 dbd

It seems to works on 14 MHz (stacked dipoles at 14 MHz), but on 10
meters the single 10 meter dipole blows it away.

Quoting the ARRL Antenna Book: "It should be designed
for the higher of the two frequencies using 3/4 lamda
spacing between parallel elements. It will then operate
on the lower frequency ... with 3/8 lamda spacing.

If you have 5/8 lamda spacing on 20m, you will have
5/4 lamda spacing on 10m with poor performance.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Jul 5, 11:04 pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
Michael wrote:
According to the ARRL handbook the highest gain is achieve with a
5/8ths wave spacing between the upper and lower elements. The
handbook gives the following figures for estimated gain.

3/8 wave spacing = 4.4 dbd
1/2 wave spacing = 5.9 dbd
5/8 wave spacing = 6.7 dbd
3/4 wave spacing = 6.6 dbd

It seems to works on 14 MHz (stacked dipoles at 14 MHz), but on 10
meters the single 10 meter dipole blows it away.

Quoting the ARRL Antenna Book: "It should be designed
for the higher of the two frequencies using 3/4 lamda
spacing between parallel elements. It will then operate
on the lower frequency ... with 3/8 lamda spacing.

If you have 5/8 lamda spacing on 20m, you will have
5/4 lamda spacing on 10m with poor performance.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Not only that, but will depend if feeding end fire, or broadside.
It's only as a broadside array that max gain is at 5/8 wl
spacing.
And he is feeding his as an end fire array. The elements would
need to be end to end IE: collinear, array to be fed as a broadside
array.
As an end fire, the spacing must be quite a bit closer. If I remember
right, max gain with an end fire array is appx 1/8 wl spacing.
But from my own experimenting around with them, it's not
ultra critical as far as getting them to work.
In my case, I was feeding each element with a separate
feed line, and changing lengths to steer the array.
It was quite crude, but worked pretty well.
In my case, I tried to compromise on the spacing so I
could feed it both end fire, and broadside. I think I used
about 1/4 wl.
I also used about the same scheme on 10m, using two
5/8 wl ground planes. I forgot the exact spacing I used.
It was more dictated by available mast/.vent pipe locations
more than trying to get an exact length.
But it was a compromise spacing, and I fed it both ways
depending on the pattern I wanted.