| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:31:47 GMT, Lancer wrote:
Dave; I know this was directed to Frank, hope you don't mind if I comment? This is a public forum, comments from participants is what it's all about. A dipole is a dipole. It has 0 db of gain, and that assumes a resonant dipole . If the dipole is non-resonant and requires a tuner to force an impedance match, it will have further losses. It won't stand a chance against a commercially produced (or home made if you are so-inclined) 5/8th wave vertical (with proper radials, not an Imax). Because a dipole/antenna is non-resonant it doesn't automatically mean it will be a more "lossy" antenna. A non-resonant dipole fed with ladder line can/will end up being a more efficient antenna than a resonant dipole fed with coax and a balun. In what way? If the length of the dipole is at a no resonant length, you have to "force" it to a proper impedance match through the use of a tuner. Standing waves will still be present after the tuner, and efficiency will suffer as a result. Why have a resonant antenna at all if a non-resonant antenna works better? It doesn't make sense. I've tried loading up different antennas that I've had to run on bands they were not designed for, and while I could certainly get better than a 1.5:1 SWR, they might as well be a load of bed springs for as well as it worked. I have built non-resonant antennas that beat a 5/8ths. A 5/8ths is hard pressed achieve the claims for gain that it has.The only commercial 5/8th that I seen that was properly decoupled was an Isotron. An Isopole maybe? IIRC, that's a 2 meter antenna. I never particularly liked them. I've had better performance from a Hustler G7. Especially on VHF, you don't see people running non-resonant dipoles. Gain is particularly important there. Proper decoupling can be achieved through the proper use of a radial counterpoise, which is what is lacking in the "stick" style antennas we're discussing on CB I've done this type of antenna myself and never had any problems with local contacts -- in fact, it worked a lot better than the 9' whip on the truck. I find that very hard to believe, assuming identical height and conditions, as my own experiences prove otherwise. I ran a home brewed wire dipole on CB years ago, and used it in addition to my main 5/8th wave antenna. While the dipole worked well when the skip was running, locally, the signal from the dipole was a few "S" units less than the ground plane. With 4 watts of power, you don't get much range on a horizontal wire dipole strung in a tree. Well there's your problem, Dave -- I didn't say anything about horizontal. On the contrary, it's better if it isn't. Yea, if you're talking local. For DX, horizontal is usually better for a number of reasons, most notably a lower noise floor and better take off angle. Horizontal antennas are dependant on height above ground and the conductivity of the ground they are above. The closer to the ground and more lossy the ground, the higher the take off angle. That is correct. For best performance, a dipole needs to be at least 1/2 wave above the ground. Since most man made noise tends to be vertically polarized, a horizontal antenna tends to quieter. Also correct. Like I said before, just throw some wire up into the trees (or whatever tall object happens to be available). Didn't you read the link I posted? Of course. But a dipole is a basic antenna. It has no gain. A properly made purpose built CB antenna will out perform it. Let's look at this from a practical standpoint. If a non-resonant, tuner fed dipole worked so well, then why aren't all CB'ers using one? Why would people want huge 5/8th wave antennas then? Better tell Jay to forget about selling his Interceptor, since a simple non-resonant dipole will work just as well and for far less money. A non-resonant dipole has ONE big advantage. It's a compromise antenna that will work on all the HF bands. That's great if you don't have the room to put up single band antennas for each band. But like any compromise, it will not work as well as a dedicated antenna for each band. Such a compromise is usually acceptable for a ham who has 1500 watts on tap. But for a 4 watt CB'er, who needs to squeeze every watt of ERP he can for best local range, he needs a high gain efficient antenna. Again, non-resonant deosn't mean that its not efficient. Your looking at a non-resonant antenna as a chunk of wire thats just tossed in a tree. A resonant antenna doesn't have any magical gain over a non-resonant antenna just because its resonant. An antenna radiates most efficiently at its resonant frequency. Practical experience with local communications pretty much supports my observations (or more accurately is the basis for them). I've made many dipoles over the years, and none of them have ever matched or even came close to the 5/8th wave ground plane for local work on CB. DX is another matter. Dipoles work very well there. Perhaps that's why many H.F. hams have several different antennas to switch to, to take advantage of varying DX conditions or groundwave, as their communications dictate. When working 40 meter groundwave, a ground mounted vertical is often a superior choice. Dave "Sandbagger" http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Tuning a ground plane | Antenna | |||
| Grounding Question | Antenna | |||
| Grounding Rod | Shortwave | |||
| Ground and static protection question | Shortwave | |||
| RF in shack and ground question | Equipment | |||