I was researching multi-element driven array antennas when I stumbled
across the web page below. It talks about a curtain quad antenna. Is
this proven antenna design or antenna snake oil?

http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuad.htm

-Michael Rawls
KS4HY

On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:00:44 -0700 (PDT), Michael
wrote:


I was researching multi-element driven array antennas when I stumbled
across the web page below. It talks about a curtain quad antenna. Is
this proven antenna design or antenna snake oil?

http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuad.htm

-Michael Rawls
KS4HY

Hi Michael,

Looks like the author went to a lot of trouble - with passion.

There is nothing unreasonable about the design or the results.
However, you should note these designs are highly removed from
ground's proximity which can skew many, finely tuned projects.

You should also note what is typically referred to as the decline on
return for your investment as the design gets bigger. Further, in
actual construction, you rarely obtain the mathematical precision that
is required to enjoy the forecasted results.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:00:44 -0700 (PDT), Michael
wrote:

I was researching multi-element driven array antennas when I stumbled
across the web page below. It talks about a curtain quad antenna. Is
this proven antenna design or antenna snake oil?

http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuad.htm

Very real. I built the 2.4Ghz version. It works, but is rather
large. Unless you have plenty of real estate and tall towers, this is
not an HF antenna.

His curtain quad calculations and NEC2 deck are at:
http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuadFigure11.htm

There's also the Sterba Curtain
http://imageevent.com/holl_ands/notfortv/sterba;jsessionid=ldhsj5x2v1.penguin_s
Gray-Hoverman
http://imageevent.com/holl_ands/grayhoverman/hovermantype1
and other antennas
http://imageevent.com/holl_ands/chireix/chireixmesnyrefl
resembling a collection of quads. As long as you get the phasing
correct, almost any geometry will radiate and have gain.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 6/28/2011 1:11 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:00:44 -0700 (PDT), Michael
wrote:


I was researching multi-element driven array antennas when I stumbled
across the web page below. It talks about a curtain quad antenna. Is
this proven antenna design or antenna snake oil?

http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuad.htm

-Michael Rawls
KS4HY

Hi Michael,

Looks like the author went to a lot of trouble - with passion.

There is nothing unreasonable about the design or the results.
However, you should note these designs are highly removed from
ground's proximity which can skew many, finely tuned projects.

You should also note what is typically referred to as the decline on
return for your investment as the design gets bigger. Further, in
actual construction, you rarely obtain the mathematical precision that
is required to enjoy the forecasted results.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hi Richard,

I note that these were designed at 1296. They would likely be a
practical antenna on that band and ground would not be an issue although
trees may be.

I wonder how hard it would be to make one as a printed circuit board?

Not too long do I wonder. The structure will be exactly as defined
within limits of the board specs.

The only issue is how large PCB stock I can buy.

tom
K0TAR

On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 20:54:05 -0500, tom wrote:

Hi Richard,

I note that these were designed at 1296. They would likely be a
practical antenna on that band and ground would not be an issue although
trees may be.

I wonder how hard it would be to make one as a printed circuit board?

Not too long do I wonder. The structure will be exactly as defined
within limits of the board specs.

The only issue is how large PCB stock I can buy.

tom
K0TAR

Hi Tom,

If you could generate a graphic with controlled geometry at that
scale, and then etch it, yes, I think it would work quite well.

I will now (most modestly) add my own contributions posted some
decade++ ago (humble, humble) at:
http://www.qsl.net/kb7qhc/antenna/fr...244c/index.htm
for which we may thank the ex-N1IR (who graciously abandoned his
soiled moniker for another to inherit) for the fractal variant to
orthodoxy. Oh woe betides the unknowing innocent for whom this may
all seem irreverent and confusingly impenetrable. (Yes, I am in my
cups. Taking a bow. Grandiloquent sweeping gesture to the audience.)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 6/28/2011 9:59 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
cups. Taking a bow. Grandiloquent sweeping gesture to the audience.)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Thanks for the new word. Never ran across grandiloquent before.

tom
K0TAR

On 6/28/2011 1:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:00:44 -0700 (PDT), Michael
wrote:

I was researching multi-element driven array antennas when I stumbled
across the web page below. It talks about a curtain quad antenna. Is
this proven antenna design or antenna snake oil?

http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuad.htm

Very real. I built the 2.4Ghz version. It works, but is rather
large. Unless you have plenty of real estate and tall towers, this is
not an HF antenna.


Hi Jeff,
Why didn't the loop sizes shrink, when the author went from 1296Mhz
to 2400Mhz. First thing I thought about was etching it on a PCB.
But then saw he built the higher freq antenna with the same loop
lengths.
Mikek



His curtain quad calculations and NEC2 deck are at:
http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuadFigure11.htm

There's also the Sterba Curtain
http://imageevent.com/holl_ands/notfortv/sterba;jsessionid=ldhsj5x2v1.penguin_s
Gray-Hoverman
http://imageevent.com/holl_ands/grayhoverman/hovermantype1
and other antennas
http://imageevent.com/holl_ands/chireix/chireixmesnyrefl
resembling a collection of quads. As long as you get the phasing
correct, almost any geometry will radiate and have gain.

El 28-06-11 20:00, Michael escribió:

I was researching multi-element driven array antennas when I stumbled
across the web page below. It talks about a curtain quad antenna. Is
this proven antenna design or antenna snake oil?

http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuad.htm

-Michael Rawls
KS4HY

Hello Michael,

It isn't snake oil, but with many elements, it is difficult to get it
working in practice. Such structures are narrow band and you don't
have a single tuning point to correct something.

If you plan to build an existing antenna, make sure to make a real
good copy of it. Just a good SWR doesn't automatically mean you have
the correct current distribution to get the stated gain.

With kind regards.


Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
Please remove abc first in case of PM

On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 12:43:16 -0500, amdx wrote:


Hi Jeff,
Why didn't the loop sizes shrink, when the author went from 1296Mhz
to 2400Mhz. First thing I thought about was etching it on a PCB.
But then saw he built the higher freq antenna with the same loop
lengths.
Mikek

I'm not quite sure what you mean. However, I have a guess(tm).

His curtain quad calculations and NEC2 deck are at:
http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuadFigure11.htm

If you scroll down to the bottom of the NEC deck, you'll find the
line:
FR 0 1 0 0 1332 0 'simulation is at 1332 MHz
That's the operating frequency. Change it to 2442 MHz and you have a
2.4GHz antenna.

The element dimensions in the NEC deck are in wavelengths. This makes
it very easy to use a design on different frequency. In order to
obtain construction lengths, simply multiply each element length by
the free space wavelegth. For 2.4GHz, that's about 12.5cm.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 7/16/2011 5:50 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 12:43:16 -0500, wrote:


Hi Jeff,
Why didn't the loop sizes shrink, when the author went from 1296Mhz
to 2400Mhz. First thing I thought about was etching it on a PCB.
But then saw he built the higher freq antenna with the same loop
lengths.
Mikek

I'm not quite sure what you mean. However, I have a guess(tm).

His curtain quad calculations and NEC2 deck are at:
http://home.comcast.net/~ross_anderson/CurtainQuadFigure11.htm

If you scroll down to the bottom of the NEC deck, you'll find the
line:
FR 0 1 0 0 1332 0 'simulation is at 1332 MHz
That's the operating frequency. Change it to 2442 MHz and you have a
2.4GHz antenna.

The element dimensions in the NEC deck are in wavelengths. This makes
it very easy to use a design on different frequency. In order to
obtain construction lengths, simply multiply each element length by
the free space wavelegth. For 2.4GHz, that's about 12.5cm.

Ah.. I'm still confused, For the 1296 antenna he used 2" x 3" fence
material and then the same 2" x 3" for the 2.4Ghz antenna except for
wire diameter.
Mikek