Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article . com,
"RHF" wrote: Snip = = = In , = = = "Jack Painter" 223bthp@c... wrote: C.E., I didn't mean to imply that an HF antenna would normally transmit farther than it can receive, only that a random wire can sometimes outperform it on the receive-end. This can happen even when listening on the transmitting antenna's resonant frequency. Snip Highly unlikely on receive for the same reason as on transmit. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Highly unlikely on receive for the same reason as on transmit.
-- Telamon Ventura, California I agree in general, except for the fact that a dipole has a characteristic directionality, whereas a random wire significantly shorter than the wavelength will be omnidirectional. I suspect that there will be occasional times when this factor matters. When it doesn't matter, a random wire is still a more versatile antenna than a single-lambda dipole, even when untuned. I have an Alpha-Delta DXUltra, which is basically a multi-lambda dipole, and a 60-foot random wire through a transformer at 20 feet elevation above ground. Noise levels aside, there is little I can hear on the DXUltra that doesn't appear on the wire, and quite a bit on the wire, especially at freqs 6 MHz, that is inaudible on the DXUltra (even though the DXUltra supposedly is good down to 120 meters - this loss of signal may be a function of inadequate height, since the antenna center is only 27 feet sloping to 7 feet at either end). Bruce Jensen |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 8 Sep 2005 08:17:00 -0700, "bpnjensen" wrote:
I agree in general, except for the fact that a dipole has a characteristic directionality, whereas a random wire significantly shorter than the wavelength will be omnidirectional. I suspect that there will be occasional times when this factor matters. When it doesn't matter, a random wire is still a more versatile antenna than a single-lambda dipole, even when untuned. I have an Alpha-Delta DXUltra, which is basically a multi-lambda dipole, and a 60-foot random wire through a transformer at 20 feet elevation above ground. Noise levels aside, there is little I can hear on the DXUltra that doesn't appear on the wire, and quite a bit on the wire, especially at freqs 6 MHz, that is inaudible on the DXUltra (even though the DXUltra supposedly is good down to 120 meters - this loss of signal may be a function of inadequate height, since the antenna center is only 27 feet sloping to 7 feet at either end). Bruce Jensen I find a random wire superior overall to just about any ''tailor made'' SWL antenna I've tried. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I find a random wire superior overall to just about any ''tailor
made'' SWL antenna I've tried. I do find that the dipole is wonderful on 7 MHz, and 11 MHz and up. On 9 and 6 it's about a toss-up, and on down through the tropicals the wire is better. My big problem is noise, especially on the lower bands. I have an MFJ noise cancelling unit that works with the two antennas, but I think two simpel wires phased would work rather better. If I can arrange such an array that can be set up on my smallish property, I will let folks know. Meanwhile, I still have a large horizontal loop to build around my fence... Bruce Jensen |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 8 Sep 2005 10:34:24 -0700, "bpnjensen" wrote:
I find a random wire superior overall to just about any ''tailor made'' SWL antenna I've tried. I do find that the dipole is wonderful on 7 MHz, and 11 MHz and up. On 9 and 6 it's about a toss-up, and on down through the tropicals the wire is better. My big problem is noise, especially on the lower bands. I have an MFJ noise cancelling unit that works with the two antennas, but I think two simpel wires phased would work rather better. If I can arrange such an array that can be set up on my smallish property, I will let folks know. Meanwhile, I still have a large horizontal loop to build around my fence... Bruce Jensen I've used the MFJ Noise Canceller with an MFJ-1024 Remote Active antenna for the noise sense with decent results. Since then I ditched my Linksys router and 90% of the noise went away. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
David wrote: On 8 Sep 2005 08:17:00 -0700, "bpnjensen" wrote: I agree in general, except for the fact that a dipole has a characteristic directionality, whereas a random wire significantly shorter than the wavelength will be omnidirectional. I suspect that there will be occasional times when this factor matters. When it doesn't matter, a random wire is still a more versatile antenna than a single-lambda dipole, even when untuned. I have an Alpha-Delta DXUltra, which is basically a multi-lambda dipole, and a 60-foot random wire through a transformer at 20 feet elevation above ground. Noise levels aside, there is little I can hear on the DXUltra that doesn't appear on the wire, and quite a bit on the wire, especially at freqs 6 MHz, that is inaudible on the DXUltra (even though the DXUltra supposedly is good down to 120 meters - this loss of signal may be a function of inadequate height, since the antenna center is only 27 feet sloping to 7 feet at either end). Bruce Jensen I find a random wire superior overall to just about any ''tailor made'' SWL antenna I've tried. An antenna "tailored" for a frequency will pick up more signal energy on that frequency than an antenna of the same type that is not resonant at that frequency. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Telamon - I 'theory' you are correct.
|
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article .com,
"bpnjensen" wrote: Highly unlikely on receive for the same reason as on transmit. -- Telamon Ventura, California I agree in general, except for the fact that a dipole has a characteristic directionality, whereas a random wire significantly shorter than the wavelength will be omnidirectional. I suspect that there will be occasional times when this factor matters. When it doesn't matter, a random wire is still a more versatile antenna than a single-lambda dipole, even when untuned. I have an Alpha-Delta DXUltra, which is basically a multi-lambda dipole, and a 60-foot random wire through a transformer at 20 feet elevation above ground. Noise levels aside, there is little I can hear on the DXUltra that doesn't appear on the wire, and quite a bit on the wire, especially at freqs 6 MHz, that is inaudible on the DXUltra (even though the DXUltra supposedly is good down to 120 meters - this loss of signal may be a function of inadequate height, since the antenna center is only 27 feet sloping to 7 feet at either end). The assertion that RHF made was that resonance on an antenna is not important on receive and only important on transmit. It is a tried and true technique to cut a dipole for a certain receive frequency. When an dipole antenna is at resonance it will generate a larger voltage from a distant signal on that frequency than other frequencies above and below it for the same reason more power will be radiated from it on transmit. Depending on a number of other factors this alone may or may not allow you to hear a distant station at a level better than the random wire. The random wire is not omnidirectional and a direction it can pick up a signal well will depend on frequency, its length, distance from the ground and a few other things. That's just the physics of the statements in question. Now if you want to qualify it with other criteria such as "I can hear the same stuff on a random wire" that is a different story. Resonance is an important quality in any antenna. The random wire is just called random because you are NOT building it with a particular resonant frequency in mind. A random wire is resonant at some frequency and will perform better at that point just as a dipole or nearly any other antenna as a general rule. There are exceptions of course such as very electrically short antennas designed to be amplified due to the low efficiency. There resonance is not a factor considered in its operation. A random wire antenna is half an antenna where the other half is ground. For it to work well generally means you need a good outdoor RF ground. This can be a problem itself depending on where you live. A dipole is a full antenna that does not need an RF ground to work properly. A random wire is a common mode antenna that will do a good job of picking up local electrical noise so the criteria is that you need a good RF ground or radials in its place and you need to live in an electrically quiet area. If the Alpha-Delta DXUltra is worth the money you paid for it it should work better then a "random wire" at some frequencies. Sometimes the behavior of antennas or circuits is not apparent by only looking at a small selection of frequencies. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
For One and All,
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Questions -?- Considering a 'small' Shortwave Listener's (SWLs) Antenna | Shortwave | |||
Putting a Ferrite Rod at the Far-End of a Random Wire Antenna ? | Antenna | |||
Two questions about random wire antennas | Shortwave | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna |