RadioBanter

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)
-   Antenna (https://www.radiobanter.com/antenna/)
-   -   Tuned dipole Q: (https://www.radiobanter.com/antenna/62736-tuned-dipole-q.html)

Ken Bessler January 26th 05 09:05 PM

Tuned dipole Q:
 
My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without
a tuner from 1.800 to 1.930. I mainly operate in
that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a tuner for
operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and
use a tuner to go lower or do it the way I'm doing now
(resonate low and use a tuner to go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess
is (at these freqs) no......

--
73's es gd dx de Ken KGØWX
Grid EM17ip, Flying Pigs #1055,
List Owner, Yahoo! E-groups:
VX-2R & FT-857



W9DMK January 26th 05 09:27 PM

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:05:39 -0600, "Ken Bessler"
wrote:

My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without
a tuner from 1.800 to 1.930. I mainly operate in
that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a tuner for
operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and
use a tuner to go lower or do it the way I'm doing now
(resonate low and use a tuner to go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess
is (at these freqs) no......


Dear Ken,

Your trap dipole is resonant only in the sense that you see
approximately 50 + j 0 ohms at the input to the feedline. I will
assume that it is not actually of the length of a "resonant dipole"
(about 260 ft.).

Therefore, we are talking about a "resonant" antenna/feedline
"system".

The next issue is the radiation pattern of the antenna. Regardless of
how you use it (i.e., with or without a tuner), it will have a pattern
that is a function of its configuration and operating frequency.
Whether or not a tuner is involved is not a factor.

The only real issue is efficiency. Everything else being equal, the
tuner is going to rob you of some of your power. How much will depend
on many factors - the primary ones being the actual impedance seen by
the tuner and the specific design of the tuner - especially its
inductor.

Therefore, it would appear that you are doing the best thing - namely,
to use the tuner only when you have to.

Bob, W9DMK, Dahlgren, VA
Replace "nobody" with my callsign for e-mail
http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
http://zaffora/f2o.org/W9DMK/W9dmk.html


Allodoxaphobia January 26th 05 10:35 PM

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 21:27:31 GMT, W9DMK wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:05:39 -0600, "Ken Bessler"
wrote:

My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without
a tuner from 1.800 to 1.930. I mainly operate in
that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a tuner for
operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and
use a tuner to go lower or do it the way I'm doing now
(resonate low and use a tuner to go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess
is (at these freqs) no......


Dear Ken,

Your trap dipole is resonant only in the sense that you see
approximately 50 + j 0 ohms at the input to the feedline. I will
assume that it is not actually of the length of a "resonant dipole"
(about 260 ft.).

Therefore, we are talking about a "resonant" antenna/feedline
"system".

The next issue is the radiation pattern of the antenna. Regardless of
how you use it (i.e., with or without a tuner), it will have a pattern
that is a function of its configuration and operating frequency.
Whether or not a tuner is involved is not a factor.

The only real issue is efficiency. Everything else being equal, the
tuner is going to rob you of some of your power. How much will depend
on many factors - the primary ones being the actual impedance seen by
the tuner and the specific design of the tuner - especially its
inductor.

Therefore, it would appear that you are doing the best thing - namely,
to use the tuner only when you have to.


However, I would like to see an answer to his question:

1. Is it best to cut "high" and tune for "low" when necc.?
-or-
2. Is it best to cut "low" and tune for "high" when necc.?

-- when operating on a band (i.e., 75/80M or 160M) where a 50 to
100 kcs. shift in freq. is a large'ish percentage change in
wavelength.

3. ..or, is it Mox Nix?

73
Jonesy
--
| Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux
| Gunnison, Colorado | @ | Jonesy | OS/2 __
| 7,703' -- 2,345m | config.com | DM68mn SK

Hal Rosser January 26th 05 11:30 PM


I read somewhere that as the length of each leg of the dipole approaches 5/8
wave the gain increases.
(The reason for the 5/8-wave vertical )
So - from that - I would gues you'd have a smidgen better antenna by cutting
it long and tuning to match.
But for the record - I would cut it so as to use the tuner less often.



W9DMK January 27th 05 02:43 AM

On 26 Jan 2005 22:35:18 GMT, Allodoxaphobia
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 21:27:31 GMT, W9DMK wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:05:39 -0600, "Ken Bessler"
wrote:

My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without
a tuner from 1.800 to 1.930. I mainly operate in
that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a tuner for
operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and
use a tuner to go lower or do it the way I'm doing now
(resonate low and use a tuner to go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess
is (at these freqs) no......


Dear Ken,

Your trap dipole is resonant only in the sense that you see
approximately 50 + j 0 ohms at the input to the feedline. I will
assume that it is not actually of the length of a "resonant dipole"
(about 260 ft.).

Therefore, we are talking about a "resonant" antenna/feedline
"system".

The next issue is the radiation pattern of the antenna. Regardless of
how you use it (i.e., with or without a tuner), it will have a pattern
that is a function of its configuration and operating frequency.
Whether or not a tuner is involved is not a factor.

The only real issue is efficiency. Everything else being equal, the
tuner is going to rob you of some of your power. How much will depend
on many factors - the primary ones being the actual impedance seen by
the tuner and the specific design of the tuner - especially its
inductor.

Therefore, it would appear that you are doing the best thing - namely,
to use the tuner only when you have to.


However, I would like to see an answer to his question:

1. Is it best to cut "high" and tune for "low" when necc.?
-or-
2. Is it best to cut "low" and tune for "high" when necc.?

-- when operating on a band (i.e., 75/80M or 160M) where a 50 to
100 kcs. shift in freq. is a large'ish percentage change in
wavelength.

3. ..or, is it Mox Nix?


I don't consider 50 - 100 kHz to be a sufficiently large shift to make
any difference. It's only 2 1/2%, which is nothing.

So, you are correct - es macht Nichts aus!

Remember, "resonance" is not all it's cracked up to be. In fact, it's
almost irrelevant at the typical heights above ground encountered (45
ft or less for 80 and 160 m). I'm not saying that you do not need to
cut a dipole to the frequency. What I am saying is that at low heights
all the power goes straight into the clouds, anyway. The reason most
people like "resonance" is for the ease of matching to the rig's
output stage - not that the antenna works any better. You probably
don't care in which direction in the horizontal plane the energy goes
- it's going to be wrong half of the time, anyway - right?


Bob, W9DMK, Dahlgren, VA
Replace "nobody" with my callsign for e-mail
http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
http://zaffora/f2o.org/W9DMK/W9dmk.html


W9DMK January 27th 05 02:48 AM

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:30:36 -0500, "Hal Rosser"
wrote:


I read somewhere that as the length of each leg of the dipole approaches 5/8
wave the gain increases.
(The reason for the 5/8-wave vertical )
So - from that - I would gues you'd have a smidgen better antenna by cutting
it long and tuning to match.
But for the record - I would cut it so as to use the tuner less often.



Do you suppose, by any chance, that Louis Varney had anything like
that in mind when he invented the G5RV antenna specifically for the 20
m band with its 1.5 wavelength flat-top ( about 3/4 wavelength on each
side)?


Bob, W9DMK, Dahlgren, VA
Replace "nobody" with my callsign for e-mail
http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
http://zaffora/f2o.org/W9DMK/W9dmk.html


Buck January 27th 05 06:21 AM

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:05:39 -0600, "Ken Bessler"
wrote:

My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without
a tuner from 1.800 to 1.930. I mainly operate in
that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a tuner for
operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and
use a tuner to go lower or do it the way I'm doing now
(resonate low and use a tuner to go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess
is (at these freqs) no......



My opinion is that it is better to use the longest antenna reasonably
possible and use the tuner to trim it.
Buck
--
For what it's worth.


Cecil Moore January 27th 05 03:22 PM

W9DMK (Robert Lay) wrote:
Do you suppose, by any chance, that Louis Varney had anything like
that in mind when he invented the G5RV antenna specifically for the 20
m band with its 1.5 wavelength flat-top ( about 3/4 wavelength on each
side)?


I read somewhere that Louis wanted that nice
cloverleaf pattern on 20m from his home QTH.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Cecil Moore January 27th 05 03:31 PM

Buck wrote:
My opinion is that it is better to use the longest antenna reasonably
possible and use the tuner to trim it.


The proper choice of feedline length will tune it
to system resonance without a conventional tuner.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Cecil Moore January 27th 05 03:42 PM

Cecil Moore wrote:

Buck wrote:
My opinion is that it is better to use the longest antenna reasonably
possible and use the tuner to trim it.


The proper choice of feedline length will tune it
to system resonance without a conventional tuner.


And of course, I'm talking about ladder-line, not coax.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Spam Fighter January 27th 05 04:47 PM

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:05:39 -0600, Ken Bessler wrote:

My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without a tuner from 1.800 to
1.930. I mainly operate in that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a
tuner for operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and use a tuner to
go lower or do it the way I'm doing now (resonate low and use a tuner to
go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess is (at these freqs)
no......


How about a compromise? Split the difference.

1. Tune low, measure the length.
2. Tune high by trimming, measure the new length.
3. Solder a piece of wire equal to the difference in leg lengths to one
leg only.



Wes Stewart January 27th 05 06:36 PM

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:05:39 -0600, "Ken Bessler"
wrote:

My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without
a tuner from 1.800 to 1.930. I mainly operate in
that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a tuner for
operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and
use a tuner to go lower or do it the way I'm doing now
(resonate low and use a tuner to go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess
is (at these freqs) no......



Not enough info to tell. You need to measure or calculate the input Z
of your transmission line with the two (or more) wire lengths and then
calculate the tuner loss for each case. This will depend of the
topology of the tuner.

Remember that as a general rule, the tuner capacitors are lower loss
than the inductors. I think that you will find that over this
restricted frequency range there will be little difference, although
with some weird line length, you might create a condition where the
tuner is quite lossy.



Buck January 27th 05 10:15 PM

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:05:39 -0600, "Ken Bessler"
wrote:

My 160/80m trap dipole can be operated without
a tuner from 1.800 to 1.930. I mainly operate in
that range (usually on 1.893) and I have a tuner for
operating above 1.930. Easy.

My question is this - is it better to resonate high and
use a tuner to go lower or do it the way I'm doing now
(resonate low and use a tuner to go higher)?

Or will it even matter enough to notice??? My guess
is (at these freqs) no......



I use a multi-band dipole, but it is full length. I have about 130
feet of 75 meter dipole and 67 feet for 40 meters (the lengths may
vary, but they are tuned to the SSB portions I use.) I feed them into
the house via 75 ohm coax. The 40 meter elements hang about 6 inches
below the 75 meter element. No tuner or other matching is necessary
and the 75 meters band width is increased because of the 40 meter
hanging below it.

This is the same style antenna I used for the first time as a novice.
I have continued to use it over the last 26 years.

If you are going to use a tuner for tuning the antenna to all bands, I
would eliminate the traps altogether and tune down the 75/80 meter
elements. There are several places on the Web that explain what
lengths actually work best for all-band operation.

Someone has an Off-center Fed Dipole that they claim works really well
for all bands and it is a bit shorter than the 1/2 wave 80 meter
dipole. Look for Off center fed dipole and doublets in a search
engine. I am sure you will keep yourself occupied for many hours
reading various solutions. I am sure one of them will fit your need
perfectly.

Good luck.

Buck
N4PGW
Buck
--
For what it's worth.


Ken Bessler January 28th 05 12:34 AM

Thanks to everyone for the info. For the record, I'm
going to leave the antenna tuned for 1.875 and use
the tuner for those rare times when I go above 1.930.

Since I operate on 1.893 about 75% of the time (not
using the tuner at all), I figure I'll be OK.

--
73's es gd dx de Ken KGØWX
Grid EM17ip, Flying Pigs #1055,
List Owner, Yahoo! E-groups:
VX-2R & FT-857




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com