Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
starman wrote:
Dave wrote: Replies interspersed "starman" wrote in message ... Dave wrote: Starman, I am no longer intending to use a folded dipole, or a dipole of any kind. I am currently planning to connect the conductors at the far end of the 300 ohm twinlead but only connect one side of the near end to the 300/75 ohm matching transformer. Will this not work? I don't need perfection, just reasonably good (I think.) Thanks, Dave So you're going to use the twinlead as if it was a single wire. In that case, you might as well connect the two wires in the near end too. There isn't any advantage to keeping the wires of the near end seperated. Connect the twinlead's near end to one wire of the high impedance side (300-ohm) of the matching transformer (balun). You could feed the centre point of the horizontal twinlead as a dipole with the pair on one leg bonded and fed by the centre conductor of the co-ax or one side of your balun transformer and the pair on the other leg bonded and fed by the shield of the co-ax or the other side of the balun. Leave the two far ends separate. Cut one of the wires on each side about 1/3 or 2/3 of the way towards the end. You could peel away the remaining wire - it's just adding weight. What you end up with is two dipoles in parallel that are resonant at different frequencies and will have different radiation patterns at the same frequency. Net result will be a more omni-directional antenna than either one alone at most frequencies. Tom |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Holden" wrote in message . .. starman wrote: Dave wrote: Replies interspersed "starman" wrote in message ... Dave wrote: Starman, I am no longer intending to use a folded dipole, or a dipole of any kind. I am currently planning to connect the conductors at the far end of the 300 ohm twinlead but only connect one side of the near end to the 300/75 ohm matching transformer. Will this not work? I don't need perfection, just reasonably good (I think.) Thanks, Dave So you're going to use the twinlead as if it was a single wire. In that case, you might as well connect the two wires in the near end too. There isn't any advantage to keeping the wires of the near end seperated. Connect the twinlead's near end to one wire of the high impedance side (300-ohm) of the matching transformer (balun). You could feed the centre point of the horizontal twinlead as a dipole with the pair on one leg bonded and fed by the centre conductor of the co-ax or one side of your balun transformer and the pair on the other leg bonded and fed by the shield of the co-ax or the other side of the balun. Leave the two far ends separate. Cut one of the wires on each side about 1/3 or 2/3 of the way towards the end. You could peel away the remaining wire - it's just adding weight. What you end up with is two dipoles in parallel that are resonant at different frequencies and will have different radiation patterns at the same frequency. Net result will be a more omni-directional antenna than either one alone at most frequencies. Tom Hmmm. Something to consider. Thanks, Dave |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Antenna feed wire question | Antenna | |||
Long Wire Antenna Question | Shortwave | |||
Long Wire Antenna Question | Shortwave | |||
Long Wire Antenna Question | Shortwave | |||
Balun | Shortwave |