You would gain much more isolation by separating them vertically. Side
by side would also mess up the pattern. Not familiar with that
duplexer,but if it has a Tee at the antenna port,simply remove it and
connect the two antennas where the Tee was. This >may< throw the tuning
off some but is worth a try. Why do you feel the need to split the
antennas? Having desense problems? 73,Lee,N3APP
k3phl wrote:
>Hello all,
>
> I am considering running split antennas at my 220 MHz site in
>Philadelphia as a test to increase sensitivity and troubleshoot a
>duplex noise issue. The machine is currently a modifed Motorola
>Micor using a TX/RX 4 can duplexer, DCI bandpass filter in the RX
>leg, and a Comet Super 22 (220) base antenna.
>
> I am considering running separate Super 22 antennas 12 feet apart
>horizontally. One feedline run will go from the transmitter direct
>to the TX antenna. The other feedline run will run from the receiver
>to RX port of duplexer, common port of duplexer to 220 bandpass
>filter and then to the RX antenna. The TX port of the duplexer will
>remain unconnected.
>
> I expect the duplexer to act as a 2 can deep notch, eliminating the
>transmitter from the receiver with the TX port open. I assume the TX
>rejection in the receiver line should improve and the resulting RX
>sensitivity should improve since the transmitter has been reduced to
>a strong near field instead of RF on the same line. Is this the
>correct theory of using a duplexer in a split antenna site and if so,
>should the TX port be left unconnected or capped with a 50 ohm load?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Steve
>K3PHL
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
