30 Meter antennas
 

Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

I've used many and was just wondering if i could improve my overall DX
performance with something other than a Dipole. With out going to the
expense of a Beam.

73 Dave

Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

I've used many and was just wondering if i could improve my overall DX
performance with something other than a Dipole. With out going to the
expense of a Beam.

Without going to the expense of a reflector or a director, probably not
rotateable, there's only a vertical to try. But I'm sure a vertical will
make a big difference - either for better or worse.
---
Reg.

"KC1DI" wrote in message
...
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

I've used many and was just wondering if i could improve my overall DX
performance with something other than a Dipole. With out going to the
expense of a Beam.

73 Dave


I have used a variety of antennas on 30. At present I am using my 40m,
vertical loop, fed with 450 ohm line.

I also have a ladder line fed center fed, total length of 140' that I use
on AF MARS. Also does a good job.

Dan/W4NTI

Im running a multiband dipole for 40 and 30 meters at 50 feet. I get
great results and when the band is open get good DX results. I also
have a homebrew vertical GP that has limited results. When switching
between the 2 antenna's the dipole always receives better.
I think the height of the dipole and whether it is cut for
resonances is a big factor. I dont use a tuner for 40 or 30 meters.
Also I have a 1:1 Van Gordon High Q Balun at the feed point. My coax
run is about 60 feet.
This is a tough time to evaulate antenna's. Band condx's are so poor
that we tend to blame our equipment. A few nights ago from New
Jersey, I was getting solid contacts to Europe and South America then
the band closed.

Best 73's
Mike
WM2F

Dave,

I have a full-wave horizontal loop on 30m and a multi-band vertical for 40 -
10 (1/4 wave on 30m). The vertical is 10 feet off the ground, the loop is at
40 feet. For "local" stuff (within several hundred miles) the loop is
better. For DX, the vertical beats the loop every time.

Try a 1/4 wave ground plane and see how it works.

-larry
K8UT

"KC1DI" wrote in message
...
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

I've used many and was just wondering if i could improve my overall DX
performance with something other than a Dipole. With out going to the
expense of a Beam.

73 Dave

I have been using what I call my '$8.48 Home Depot Vertical'. That's what
the parts cost and it gives me both 40 and 30. It's a simple wire 1/4 wave
vertical for each band separated be PVC spreaders and it hangs from a tree
to a ground rod at the bottom. I have 8 16 foot radials around it (more in
the spring when the ground isn't frozen, probably up to 16). It has been
very effective on 30, better than the dipole I used prior to it. Performance
on 40 is OK. I am thinking of adding a 20 meter section. I have no problem
working DX with it on 30 or 40. Best thing I've tried on 30 so far.


"KC1DI" wrote in message
...
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

I've used many and was just wondering if i could improve my overall DX
performance with something other than a Dipole. With out going to the
expense of a Beam.

73 Dave

KC1DI wrote:
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

My 130 ft. center-fed dipole has an interesting pattern on 30m. It's
main lobes are broadside with a gain of 9 dBi, a TOA of 34 deg, and
a horizontal beamwidth of 33 deg. Off the ends, the gain is 3 dBi
with a horizontal beamwidth of 60 deg. In other words, it has gain
over a ground mounted quarter-wave monopole in 4 directions for more
than 180 degrees of the horizontal.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

KC1DI wrote:
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

Actually, my all time favorite antenna is a 40m loop closely coupled
for supergain. It has 20 dBi gain for 200 degrees of the horizontal.
It would make my 100 watt transceiver sound like about 10 kilowatts
and could be scaled for 30m but watch out for complaints that you are
running illegal power. The EZNEC file can be downloaded from my web
page below. (TIC disclaimer)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/SUPRGAIN.EZ



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

30m should certainly be well within the range of the "universal"
dipole design.

Presumably the gain/beamwidth numbers you quote come out of
a model. For completeness, what does the model say the average
gain is in the OTHER 180 degrees (the nulls)?

73, Ed


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
KC1DI wrote:
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

My 130 ft. center-fed dipole has an interesting pattern on 30m. It's
main lobes are broadside with a gain of 9 dBi, a TOA of 34 deg, and
a horizontal beamwidth of 33 deg. Off the ends, the gain is 3 dBi
with a horizontal beamwidth of 60 deg. In other words, it has gain
over a ground mounted quarter-wave monopole in 4 directions for more
than 180 degrees of the horizontal.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Old Ed wrote:

30m should certainly be well within the range of the "universal"
dipole design.

Presumably the gain/beamwidth numbers you quote come out of
a model. For completeness, what does the model say the average
gain is in the OTHER 180 degrees (the nulls)?

60 degrees of the horizontal coverage falls below the typical
1/4WL ground-mounted monopole - not a bad tradeoff, IMO.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Hi again Cecil, and thank you for responding!

But since you answered a different question than the one I asked,
I'll follow up with a few more questions.

Are the model comparisons based on power applied to the antenna
feedpoint, independent of feedline and/or tuner losses?

What height and ground conditions are you modeling for the dipole?

What radial structure are you assuming for the "typical 1/4WL
ground-mounted monopole?"

What ground conditions are you assuming for the "typical 1/4WL
ground-mounted monopole?"

What is the best (read highest average gain) elevation angle for the
dipole under the assumed conditions?

What is the best elevation angle (read highest average gain) for the
monopole under the assumed conditions?

At what elevation angle(s) are the modeled patterns being compared?

73, Ed

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Old Ed wrote:

30m should certainly be well within the range of the "universal"
dipole design.

Presumably the gain/beamwidth numbers you quote come out of
a model. For completeness, what does the model say the average
gain is in the OTHER 180 degrees (the nulls)?

60 degrees of the horizontal coverage falls below the typical
1/4WL ground-mounted monopole - not a bad tradeoff, IMO.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Old Ed wrote:
Are the model comparisons based on power applied to the antenna
feedpoint, independent of feedline and/or tuner losses?

Yes (However, for A-B comparisons, the dipole used a tuned feeder
and no tuner. The vertical was fed with RG-213 and no tuner.)

What height and ground conditions are you modeling for the dipole?

It's my typical East Texas ground at a height of 40 ft.

What radial structure are you assuming for the "typical 1/4WL
ground-mounted monopole?"

8 radials, modeled one foot above ground. A-B tests were done with
8 radials 20 ft above ground sloping down to 6 feet above ground.

What ground conditions are you assuming for the "typical 1/4WL
ground-mounted monopole?"

Typical East Texas ground, same as for the dipole

What is the best (read highest average gain) elevation angle for the
dipole under the assumed conditions?

9 dBi at 34 degrees, 8.5 dBi at 26 degrees, 0 dBi at 7 degrees

What is the best elevation angle (read highest average gain) for the
monopole under the assumed conditions?

-0.65 dBi at 34 degrees, 0 dBi at 26 degrees, -4.5 dBi at 7 degrees

At what elevation angle(s) are the modeled patterns being compared?

See above. The dipole beats the vertical by a couple of S-units in
the dipole's best direction. A-B tests were actually run on 40m.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"KC1DI" wrote in message
...
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

I've used many and was just wondering if i could improve my overall DX
performance with something other than a Dipole. With out going to the
expense of a Beam.

73 Dave


Look at a half square, could give you more than 3dbi of gain at a very low
angle, with no ground radials required.


--
John Passaneau, W3JXP
Penn State University

Hi Cecil -

Let me again thank you for taking the time to respond to my follow-up
questions! But since the questions you answered are again somewhat
different than the questions I asked, I am going to follow up yet again.

I understand that the monopole pattern is essentially toroidal, and
that the long dipole at 30m produces a more complex, lobed pattern.
The peaks of those lobes have higher gain than the broad, toroidal
pattern of the monopole. No surprises in any of that.

However, neither of these antennas are rotatable. Therefore, there
is no guarantee that either or both will always receive incoming
signals at the most favorable angles. "Average" gain across a range
of angles is therefore very relevant to any comparisons.

If you wouldn't mind exercising your model some more, here are
some questions intended to address the "average" gain topic.
(I'm stressing model results because the type of numbers requested
would be highly impractical to try to measure on the physical
antennas.)

1. At what elevation angle X does the monopole show the highest gain,
and what is that gain?

2. What is the "average" gain of the dipole, at elevation angle X, taken
over the full 360 degrees of azimuth, at one-degree increments?
(Note: Gain data points expressed in dB should be converted to
linear powers, the linear powers averaged, and then the average
linear power converted back to dB, of course. To do otherwise
would improperly penalize a lobed pattern (the dipole) that might
have one or two minus infinity dB gain values.)

3. If you're still on board with all this, it would also be interesting to
know what happens to the elevation angle and gain of the monopole
if the number of radials is kicked up to a large number, like 64.

The validity of the above depends in part on equitable assumptions
about transmission line losses in the two cases, of course.

73, Ed

Cecil Moore wrote in message ...
KC1DI wrote:
Just curious as to what most of you are using as an antenna on
the 30 Meter band?

Actually, my all time favorite antenna is a 40m loop closely coupled
for supergain. It has 20 dBi gain for 200 degrees of the horizontal.
It would make my 100 watt transceiver sound like about 10 kilowatts
and could be scaled for 30m but watch out for complaints that you are
running illegal power. The EZNEC file can be downloaded from my web
page below. (TIC disclaimer)

Have you ever actually tried one of those? I ran it thru expecting to
see a real low Z input, but was fairly high for a "supergain" type
scheme. I had to reduce the segment number to run in the demo...I got
26.3 dbi...??? I'm sort of skeptical that those actually live up to
the specs. Seems everyone would be using one...
20+ dbi is a pretty happy amount of gain for a simple loop like that.
Heck, a rhombic would have to be pretty big to do that well. Or takes
many elements for a yagi...Color me pretty skeptical til I see one in
action....:/ MK

Old Ed wrote:
1. At what elevation angle X does the monopole show the highest gain,
and what is that gain?

Already answered. If I remember right, it was 0 dBi at 26 degrees.

2. What is the "average" gain of the dipole, at elevation angle X, taken
over the full 360 degrees of azimuth, at one-degree increments?

Please define "average" gain. The reason for using a higher gain antenna
is to increase the gain above an "average" monopole. How about if I just
post the radiation pattern on my web page?

I know where I want to QSO to so I turn my 130' dipole broadside to AZ.

3. If you're still on board with all this, it would also be interesting to
know what happens to the elevation angle and gain of the monopole
if the number of radials is kicked up to a large number, like 64.

It no doubt, goes up. 8 is all I ever installed. Seems to me a waste of
effort to use 32 times the copper that it takes for a dipole and still
not have the gain of a dipole. Incidentally, my 20m-10m dipole is rotatable.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Mark Keith wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Actually, my all time favorite antenna is a 40m loop closely coupled
for supergain. It has 20 dBi gain for 200 degrees of the horizontal.
It would make my 100 watt transceiver sound like about 10 kilowatts
and could be scaled for 30m but watch out for complaints that you are
running illegal power. The EZNEC file can be downloaded from my web
page below. (TIC disclaimer)

Have you ever actually tried one of those?

Uhhhh Mark, "TIC" stands for Tongue-In-Cheek. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil Moore wrote in message ...
Mark Keith wrote:


Uhhhh Mark, "TIC" stands for Tongue-In-Cheek. :-)

If it ain't in plain langauge, I probably won't understand it...:(
I don't keep up with many of those...To me, a "tic" is kind of a
jerking motion usually in the facial area...:/ I knew that antenna had
to be a April fool's special of some kind... MK

Cecil,

OK, it was a TIC, I know that, but how does it 'fool' EZNEC?


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Mark Keith wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Actually, my all time favorite antenna is a 40m loop closely coupled
for supergain. It has 20 dBi gain for 200 degrees of the horizontal.
It would make my 100 watt transceiver sound like about 10 kilowatts
and could be scaled for 30m but watch out for complaints that you are
running illegal power. The EZNEC file can be downloaded from my web
page below. (TIC disclaimer)

Have you ever actually tried one of those?

Uhhhh Mark, "TIC" stands for Tongue-In-Cheek. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Mark Keith wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Uhhhh Mark, "TIC" stands for Tongue-In-Cheek. :-)

If it ain't in plain langauge, I probably won't understand it...:(
I don't keep up with many of those...To me, a "tic" is kind of a
jerking motion usually in the facial area...:/ I knew that antenna had
to be a April fool's special of some kind... MK

A "TIC" is a "TLA" and is kind of a jerking motion usually in
the area of the leg (or funny bone).
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Jim Leder wrote:
Cecil, OK, it was a TIC, I know that, but how does it 'fool' EZNEC?

It violates the element spacing rules. Very close spacing is not allowed.
I forget the details and stumbled upon it by accident. But that antenna
is really, really a "gain" antenna, radiating a lot more than it's
feedpoint power. :-) I should have waited until April 1.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Yep, had me scratching my head! Great April fools joke! You should have
saved it.
I looked at your original on your web page and it would be interesting to
try on 30.

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Jim Leder wrote:
Cecil, OK, it was a TIC, I know that, but how does it 'fool' EZNEC?

It violates the element spacing rules. Very close spacing is not allowed.
I forget the details and stumbled upon it by accident. But that antenna
is really, really a "gain" antenna, radiating a lot more than it's
feedpoint power. :-) I should have waited until April 1.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Hi Cecil, and thanks yet again! Comments below...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Old Ed wrote:
1. At what elevation angle X does the monopole show the highest gain,
and what is that gain?

Already answered. If I remember right, it was 0 dBi at 26 degrees.

You quoted the 0 dBi at 26 degrees in an earlier post; but
you did not identify the 26 degrees as the highest-gain angle.


2. What is the "average" gain of the dipole, at elevation angle X,
taken over the full 360 degrees of azimuth, at one-degree
increments?

Please define "average" gain. The reason for using a higher gain antenna
is to increase the gain above an "average" monopole. How about if I just
post the radiation pattern on my web page?

I did provide my definition of average (azimuthal) gain with the question;
but you snipped it out. 8-( Not to worry, I can snip it right back in
again...

"2. What is the "average" gain of the dipole, at elevation angle X, taken
over the full 360 degrees of azimuth, at one-degree increments?
(Note: Gain data points expressed in dB should be converted to
linear powers, the linear powers averaged, and then the average
linear power converted back to dB, of course. To do otherwise
would improperly penalize a lobed pattern (the dipole) that might
have one or two minus infinity dB gain values.)"

I know where I want to QSO to so I turn my 130' dipole broadside to AZ.

3. If you're still on board with all this, it would also be interesting
to know what happens to the elevation angle and gain of the
monopole if the number of radials is kicked up to a large number,
like 64.

It no doubt, goes up. 8 is all I ever installed. Seems to me a waste of
effort to use 32 times the copper that it takes for a dipole and still
not have the gain of a dipole. Incidentally, my 20m-10m dipole is
rotatable.

Well, I wasn't suggesting that you put more real copper in the ground;
I was just hoping you might put some more virtual copper in the model,
to see what happens.

As to quantity of copper (real or virtual), some folks find that wire is
cheaper than tall support masts. Other folks, perhaps with tall trees,
would see different trade-offs.

It's good your 20m-10m dipole is rotatable. Mine isn't. 8-(
But we were discussing the 130 footer, used on 30m.
If you can rotate that one, I'm impressed.

73, Ed

--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Old Ed wrote:
But we were discussing the 130 footer, used on 30m.
If you can rotate that one, I'm impressed.

Actually, I can rotate that 130 ft dipole. I live on a
triangular shaped lot so I can rotate it about 60 degrees
from either end. Presently, I have it oriented so the cloverleaf
lobes point toward the world's land masses on the higher bands.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Ahhh, enigmatic as usual! ;-) But let me guess:

Do you have alternate attachment points for one or both end(s)
of the antenna, and transfer said end(s) manually from one
attachment to the other?

If so, I would probably call the process "limited re-orientation"
or some such, vs. "rotation." But it's your antenna, so you get to
call it whatever you'd like.

And I guess there's no joy on modelling the average gain of
said antenna over azimuth. Oh well, it was a nice thought. 8-(

Good DX es 73, Ed


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Old Ed wrote:
But we were discussing the 130 footer, used on 30m.
If you can rotate that one, I'm impressed.

Actually, I can rotate that 130 ft dipole. I live on a
triangular shaped lot so I can rotate it about 60 degrees
from either end. Presently, I have it oriented so the cloverleaf
lobes point toward the world's land masses on the higher bands.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Old Ed wrote:
Do you have alternate attachment points for one or both end(s)
of the antenna, and transfer said end(s) manually from one
attachment to the other?

I have three poles arranged roughly in a triangle. My antenna has
quick disconnects on each end. It takes maybe three minutes to
rotate the antenna by 60 degrees.

And I guess there's no joy on modelling the average gain of
said antenna over azimuth. Oh well, it was a nice thought. 8-(

I offered to publish the azimuthal radiation pattern so you can
be the one to waste your time adding up 360 gains.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Have you ever actually tried one of those? (20 dBI gain for 200 degrees
of the horizontal, a loop closely coupled for supergain)"

Excellent question.

J.D. Kraus is the leading exponent of the "supergain antenna"(W8JK)
which he warns has a price in low feedpoint impedance, low efficiency,
and reduced bandwidth (higher Q).

Felow author F.E. Terman reiterates Kraus` caveats.

Kraus says the W8JK has a gain of 5.8 dBi. That is pretty good for two
1/2-wave elements and compares with a 3-element Yagi. When you replace
the straifgt elements in a Yagi with loops to make a "quagi" you may
gain about 2 dB. Design it for maximum gain, and you may pick up about 2
more dB. So, with a "supergain quagi" why wouldn`t you expect gain to be
limited tio about 10 dB.

The W8JK pattern is a figure-8 almost like a dipole but it gets 5-6 dBi
gain from reorientation of energy and that is 3-4 dB better than a
dipole. An array of two close-spaced quads will probably be sharper yet.
The W8JK pattern is shown in Fig 71 on page 8-50 of the 19th edition of
the ARRL Antenna Book. It seems to have about 100-degrees of beamwidth
in forward and reverse directions, so that may qualify as 200-degrees.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:42:03 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

I offered to publish the azimuthal radiation pattern so you can
be the one to waste your time adding up 360 gains.

Cecil,

If you wish you can send me the *.ez file and I'll run it with
MultiNec using the EZNEC engine. As MultiNec is an Excel worksheet it
is very easy to set up an unused cell to give the average gain of a
polar plot.

Or if you wish you can do it youself. MultiNec can be downloaded at:
http://www.qsl.net/ac6la/

73
Danny, K6MHE

I attributed the question:
"Have you ever actually ttried one of those?" to Cecil Moore. Mark Keith
asked as a response to Cecil. Sorry for the mistake, but it is an
excellent question that belongs to Mark Keith.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Have you ever actually tried one of those? (20 dBI gain for 200 degrees
of the horizontal, a loop closely coupled for supergain)"

Excellent question.

Richard, my posting was a tongue-in-cheek joke.
That antenna has an efficiency far in excess of 100%.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Dan Richardson wrote:
If you wish you can send me the *.ez file and I'll run it with
MultiNec using the EZNEC engine.

Hi Danny,
I'm at work and the file is at home, but it is just a 130 ft.
dipole, 40 ft. high, used on 10.125 MHz over average ground.

The wire in EZNEC looks like: 0, 0, 40 130, 0, 40 #14 131
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:29:37 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Dan Richardson wrote:
If you wish you can send me the *.ez file and I'll run it with
MultiNec using the EZNEC engine.

Hi Danny,
I'm at work and the file is at home, but it is just a 130 ft.
dipole, 40 ft. high, used on 10.125 MHz over average ground.

The wire in EZNEC looks like: 0, 0, 40 130, 0, 40 #14 131

Based on the above, the average azimuth gain @ 34º EL is 1.822 dBi

Danny

Dan Richardson wrote:

wrote:
The wire in EZNEC looks like: 0, 0, 40 130, 0, 40 #14 131

Based on the above, the average azimuth gain @ 34º EL is 1.822 dBi

Thanks, that beats the average azimuthal gain for a
ground-mounted 1/4WL monopole.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Comments below...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Dan Richardson wrote:

wrote:
The wire in EZNEC looks like: 0, 0, 40 130, 0, 40 #14 131

Based on the above, the average azimuth gain @ 34º EL is 1.822 dBi

Thanks, that beats the average azimuthal gain for a
ground-mounted 1/4WL monopole.

Using your numbers for the (somewhat radial-challenged) monopole,
the monopole peak is 1.822 dB less, but at a more favorable (for DX)
26 degrees elevation angle.

I would say that's not a bad showing, considering the much smaller
footprint and greatly reduced support requirements. But beauty is
in the eye of the beholder; and I wouldn't dream of trying to steal
your affections from the big dipole.

73, Ed

--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Hi Danny -

Thank you very much for your contribution here!
Any chance you could run another 360 azimuth cut
at 26 degrees elevation?

TNX es 73, Ed

"Dan Richardson @mendolink.com" ChangeThisToCallSign wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:29:37 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Dan Richardson wrote:
If you wish you can send me the *.ez file and I'll run it with
MultiNec using the EZNEC engine.

Hi Danny,
I'm at work and the file is at home, but it is just a 130 ft.
dipole, 40 ft. high, used on 10.125 MHz over average ground.

The wire in EZNEC looks like: 0, 0, 40 130, 0, 40 #14 131

Based on the above, the average azimuth gain @ 34º EL is 1.822 dBi

Danny

Old Ed wrote:
I would say that's not a bad showing, considering the much smaller
footprint and greatly reduced support requirements.

Huh???? My 40m monopole was the most difficult antenna I have
ever attempted to erect. My dipole goes between two trees and
gives me 9 dBi gain toward AZ on 30m. It's no contest.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:06:28 GMT, "Old Ed"
wrote:

Hi Danny -

Thank you very much for your contribution here!
Any chance you could run another 360 azimuth cut
at 26 degrees elevation?

TNX es 73, Ed

Sure Ed, however as you are comparing the dipole to a monopole I also
modeled that. The monopole was resonated at 10.125 MHz. Using 16
¼-wave in length buried 5" deep. The maximum elevation takeoff angle
reported by EZNEC/pro using the NEC4 engine was 27º.

Here are the results for average gain at 27º EL.

Monopole -1.11 dBi
Cecil's dipole 1.596 dBi

73
Danny

Oh, Cecil, Cecil, Cecil!

I appreciate your inputs, and I really don't want to pull your chain.
But I gotta say you are quite the maestro of the biased comparison!
[ Have you considered working for a network news show? ;-) ]

1. The discussion was about a 30m monopole, I thought.

2. If trees are assumed to be available to support dipoles,
then trees could be used to support a monopole.
But not being clairvoyant, I didn't know about your trees.
So what I had in mind was a self-supporting monopole,
versus 2 or 3 self-supporting dipole masts.

3. As to the gain figure, you seem to assume that the
dipole is always operating at the peak of one of its
lobes, and never has to operate in one of its nulls.
If only specific directions are of interest to you,
and if the dipole is oriented for those directions,
and if the operating frequency is low enough to
avoid multi-multi-lobe fragmentation of the pattern,
then I guess that's a good assumption for your situation.
But one can't assume that this assumption would apply
to everyone.

Here's some good news, though... Just to show you I believe
in being fair all around, I am honor-bound to report that:
Danny came up with a lower gain than you did for the modeled
monopole, thus increasing the modeled dipole's average
advantage to 2.7 dB.

BTW, I'm also using and enjoying dipoles out here in the
land of fruits and nuts.

73! Ed

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Old Ed wrote:
I would say that's not a bad showing, considering the much smaller
footprint and greatly reduced support requirements.

Huh???? My 40m monopole was the most difficult antenna I have
ever attempted to erect. My dipole goes between two trees and
gives me 9 dBi gain toward AZ on 30m. It's no contest.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Dan Richardson wrote:
Here are the results for average gain at 27º EL.

Monopole -1.11 dBi
Cecil's dipole 1.596 dBi

For more of an omni-directional pattern, a 24 ft wire hanging
down from both ends of the dipole will beat the monopole by at
least a dB in *all* directions and by 6dB in four directions.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Old Ed wrote:
2. If trees are assumed to be available to support dipoles,
then trees could be used to support a monopole.

But trees absorb energy from the monopole which has no gain
to waste. Trees absorb virtually no energy from a dipole.

3. As to the gain figure, you seem to assume that the
dipole is always operating at the peak of one of its
lobes, and never has to operate in one of its nulls.

I never operate my antenna in a null. I also don't drive my
pickup one mile per hour even if I only average driving it
one hour per day. Seems by your logic, I should always walk
since I can walk faster than the average speed of my pickup
over any 24 hour period. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----