someone tried to feed a type g5rv antenna with ´european´ zip-cord ?
(european meaning double the Volts compared to USA, thus half amps
for the same lamp wattage)
Would yield a simple ant, peel the first say abt 15- 17 meters, splitting
them up to the dipole part and the the rest X meter to a balanced tuner etc.
sorry if this has been up too many times, search did´nt give a clue!

Tnx for info, 73 Per / sm7aha malmo, sweden

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:44:33 GMT, "pegge"
wrote:
someone tried to feed a type g5rv antenna with ´european´ zip-cord ?
Would yield a simple ant, peel the first say abt 15- 17 meters, splitting
them up to the dipole part and the the rest X meter to a balanced tuner etc.

Hi Per,

Hard to apply the name g5rv to this, but that makes no difference
anyway. Simply call it a dipole driven with close spaced twin lead.
That twin lead will be 50 to 70 Ohms characteristic impedance. It
will also have a suspect dielectric loss. This does not make it a bad
antenna. There will be the usual high loss with high SWR - depending
upon the gauge of the wire.

In short, no worse than an ordinary antenna used outside of its
natural resonance.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Any body dealing with antennas in this group, what I read was pretty off
color and off subject. Want to know what a CCD antenna is really
supposed to do compared to say a delta loop...Just put one up and it
seems too good to be true compared to my well known hot signal 40 meter
delta...what is your opinion and please reply all so I will get a person
response. dont think Ill be reading this group everyday...who cares
about the british pound? EH? thanks Murray K5MDM

Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:44:33 GMT, "pegge"
wrote:

someone tried to feed a type g5rv antenna with ´european´ zip-cord ?
Would yield a simple ant, peel the first say abt 15- 17 meters, splitting
them up to the dipole part and the the rest X meter to a balanced tuner etc.


Hi Per,

Hard to apply the name g5rv to this, but that makes no difference
anyway. Simply call it a dipole driven with close spaced twin lead.
That twin lead will be 50 to 70 Ohms characteristic impedance. It
will also have a suspect dielectric loss. This does not make it a bad
antenna. There will be the usual high loss with high SWR - depending
upon the gauge of the wire.

In short, no worse than an ordinary antenna used outside of its
natural resonance.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:19:28 -0500, Murray wrote:

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

This is still pretty obnoxious.

--------------010006030806060308030708
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Any body dealing with antennas in this group, what I read was pretty off
color and off subject.

Hi Murray,

It is called the price of admission, and is the exercise of American
rights to unrestrained speech.

Want to know what a CCD antenna is really
supposed to do compared to say a delta loop...Just put one up and it
seems too good to be true compared to my well known hot signal 40 meter
delta...what is your opinion and please reply all so I will get a person
response.

The CCD is one of those arm-chair designs that is a gift to mankind in
the form of gain from a dipole.

To being with, the theory behind it is that this antenna is frequency
specific, and that it is much larger than the standard dipole it
replaces. If this is news to you, then there's trouble ahead.

Continuing, the theory behind it maintains that each section is tuned
and presents a current maxima that aids with each of its neighbors to
thus increase gain. The standard current distribution along the
standard dipole is cosine shaped by and large. For the CCD it is
presumably linear - until you get to the ends of course where it
plummets to 0 in the last section. Myself, I respond to this
description of an antenna by parts as being much like a fresnel lens
in its conception.

However, modeling, such as I have done, fails to substantiate the
claims even if through contortions and exasperation I do manage to
attains some semblance of the linear current model.

Further, physical models bear out no particular boon to mankind that
has been extolled.

dont think Ill be reading this group everyday...who cares
about the british pound? EH?

This falls into the category of off topic response, something you
presumably eschew and simultaneously indulge in. This, too, is a
commonplace activity.

I am happy to respond to all topics that interest me. There are other
endlessly boring discussion of antennas - notably those that have
survived hurricanes as evidenced by photo doctoring - that remain on
topic, and off interest. I don't complain about it though, except to
recite as a parable.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Want to know what a CCD antenna is really
supposed to do compared to say a delta loop...Just put one up and it
seems too good to be true compared to my well known hot signal 40 meter
delta...what is your opinion and please reply all so I will get a
person
response.

We already quickly talked about this a year or two ago, but
I'm not that great a fan of them. Or at least, I see no real advantage
to any other type of antenna. I've worked and check signals on scads
of those over the years, and to tell you the truth, as far as
performance
compared to just a dipole, they are often inferior in the real world.
Or to put it another way....Many of the CCD users often had inferior
signals compared to the dipole users, when you take an average
reading over a period of days or weeks.. I never saw any that were
better...
Why does it seem to good to be true? All a CDD does is supposably
maintain a more constant current distribution across the antenna.
In some cases, IE: a steep inv vee, this could be a *disadvantage*.
Or seems to me...I would prefer the current concentrated at the apex,
which is the high point of the antenna. If you spread current more
towards
lower sections of the wire, this could actually decrease perfomance.
Myself, I see no advantage, and will stick to my dipoles, etc...MK

"pegge" wrote in message
...
someone tried to feed a type g5rv antenna with ´european´ zip-cord ?
(european meaning double the Volts compared to USA, thus half amps
for the same lamp wattage)
Would yield a simple ant, peel the first say abt 15- 17 meters, splitting
them up to the dipole part and the the rest X meter to a balanced tuner
etc.
sorry if this has been up too many times, search did´nt give a clue!

Tnx for info, 73 Per / sm7aha malmo, sweden

Check out the following analysis:

http://www.vk1od.net/G5RV/index.htm

Frank

I had thought about it because I had a 500 ft roll on hand at the time - but
changed my mind because research showed zip cord to be high-loss

"pegge" wrote in message
...
someone tried to feed a type g5rv antenna with ´european´ zip-cord ?
(european meaning double the Volts compared to USA, thus half amps
for the same lamp wattage)
Would yield a simple ant, peel the first say abt 15- 17 meters, splitting
them up to the dipole part and the the rest X meter to a balanced tuner
etc.
sorry if this has been up too many times, search did´nt give a clue!

Tnx for info, 73 Per / sm7aha malmo, sweden

Hal Rosser wrote:
I had thought about it because I had a 500 ft roll on hand at the time - but
changed my mind because research showed zip cord to be high-loss

"pegge" wrote in message
...

someone tried to feed a type g5rv antenna with ´european´ zip-cord ?
(european meaning double the Volts compared to USA, thus half amps
for the same lamp wattage)
Would yield a simple ant, peel the first say abt 15- 17 meters, splitting
them up to the dipole part and the the rest X meter to a balanced tuner

etc.

sorry if this has been up too many times, search did´nt give a clue!

Tnx for info, 73 Per / sm7aha malmo, sweden





Go for it. I've seen a dipole fed by electric blasting wire. Worked fine.

Dave N WD9BDZ

I have a 40meter band xmit/recv antenna up with good swr and works great.
Cost me nothing but my time, and a plastic center insulator to strain
releive the zip cord (rather than tie a knot in the cord at the center. Just
rip down 33 ft of zip cord, tie a knot or use the insulator, and cut the
feedlinne section to a integral half wave long (20, 40, 60etc meters long).
If cut to a half wave (use a dip meter) the swr of the dipole will be
translated unaltered to the radio end of your feedline and 70 ohms is OK for
a swr of 1.4 and the xcvr will not care usually.

Great emergency antenna.



"pegge" wrote in message
...
someone tried to feed a type g5rv antenna with ´european´ zip-cord ?
(european meaning double the Volts compared to USA, thus half amps
for the same lamp wattage)
Would yield a simple ant, peel the first say abt 15- 17 meters, splitting
them up to the dipole part and the the rest X meter to a balanced tuner
etc.
sorry if this has been up too many times, search did´nt give a clue!

Tnx for info, 73 Per / sm7aha malmo, sweden

"tjs" wrote in message ...
I have a 40meter band xmit/recv antenna up with good swr and works great.
Cost me nothing but my time, and a plastic center insulator to strain
releive the zip cord (rather than tie a knot in the cord at the center. Just
rip down 33 ft of zip cord, tie a knot or use the insulator, and cut the
feedlinne section to a integral half wave long (20, 40, 60etc meters long).
If cut to a half wave (use a dip meter) the swr of the dipole will be
translated unaltered to the radio end of your feedline and 70 ohms is OK for
a swr of 1.4 and the xcvr will not care usually.

Great emergency antenna.

Why do you think the SWR of the dipole will be unaltered at the radio end of the feedline? You are apparently ignoring the loss in the line that makes the SWR at the radio end less than that at the dipole terminals.

If the zip cord had zero loss the SWR would be the same everywhere along the line, only the terminal impedance at the radio end would be the same as at the dipole.

Without knowing the vf (velocity factor) of the zip cord how do you determine that the length is a half wave?

And last, why would you want the length to be a half wave?

Walt, W2DU


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------