Richard Clark wrote in message . ..


As for "double dipping" none of your posts to date have any facts to
test your complaint. If we are to assume these two dips occur within
the same band, that is actually to your benefit as it could only
enlarge the matching prospects. However, your paucity of details
leaves this as speculation on both sides. If the two dips occur
within and without the band, then you have offered nothing to
distinguish this from the natural order of things. Simply put, ALL
dipoles have many dips throughout the spectrum. In this regard there
is nothing special about your "double resonance."


Double dips (or even triple and more) certainly
at harmonics of the fundamental, certainly.

88.1 and 92 aren't exactly harmonically related!



As for the disparaging comment of "maximum return loss suffers," that
too is in conflict with expectation. There is nothing inherently
sufferable about having more than your share of "dips." Additional
resonances does not detract from any other resonance's capacity to
perform within its region of match. A second resonance doesn't
necessarily rob another and it could be argued that it is actually a
boon if you wish to enlarge the bandwidth of an antenna (which by your
only specification of 88-108 would be a positive feature).


A broadband antenna usually doesn't have as good a
match as a dedicated antenna. This is why when i
had two dips, the min. SWR was NOT as good as when i
had only one resonant (not incuding harmonics) freq.



Now, as to HOW you could achieve TWO SWR dips within the FM broadcast
band with a "garden variety dipole," then that is revealed by your
comments about not needing (and by inference not having) your
driveline choked. Simply put, it sounds distinctly like your
transmission line length (combined with velocity factor) added a
resonant circuit in parallel with the dipole to offer this second dip.
You munged things around with the antenna, but changed lines and the
second dip went away (as a function of a different line length, or its
becoming balanced or choked). You would have to have stumbled onto an
unique antenna design to have forced these two dips into this FM band
and this is negated by your own description of a "garden variety
dipole." On the other hand, transmission line common modality is as
common as rain in Seattle.



Again, didn't need a choke for this one.

Someone infered the first problem, not high
above off the ground.

Anyone else?


S.