Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

> It doesn't work very well. Last night it was much poorer on receive and > transmit than my existing 43' vertical setup. I'm not sure what to think. Your fundamental problem is a lack of understanding of how a monopole works, specifically a base fed vertical with a ground system. Anyone who

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Guy, I need some more db's on Tx. For Rx I hear much better than heard into EU from Seattle area. It's a hard path and easy to believe EU QRN/QRM is the main culprit. Your "loss list" is a great list, but I am thinking about a different potential problem with my T with eight 125' long

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Apologies to all for delay in response. Losses related to ground and close dielectric materials remain the single monster gorilla in the room for improving TX performance of vertical antennas. Setting aside content on k2av.com relating to the FCP, the other issues in that web page’s "Loss List"

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

er K2AV Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2018 11:32 PM To: chet moore Cc: TopBand List Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2 Hi Chet, Before we start, a disclaimer: I still have my MP, maybe I'm a radio hoarder. I do have a 75A3 and a Johnson Ranger and Courier and an FT 101Z

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Thanks again everyone. I've read all your suggestions and advise and although I won't be able to make some of the more difficult (or impossible at my site) changes there are a few things I'm willing to try. I read the w0btu.com webpage and I'm not really that far off from that setup. Minus that

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

VP2A, ZD8W, VQ9Xx, KL7AIZ, KG4ZO, N6Zo/HH9 N6ZO/6Y5 -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Rob Atkinson Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2018 9:52 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2 Hmmm.

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

hen I asked what else I could do he suggested that I might want > to consider putting up a FOR SALE sign. > > Thanks again for sharing your results. > > 73 > > > Chet N4FX KP4EAJ, VP2A, ZD8W, VQ9Xx, KL7AIZ, KG4ZO, N6Zo/HH9 > N6ZO/6Y5 > > > > > >

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

KG4ZO, N6Zo/HH9 N6ZO/6Y5 -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Rob Atkinson Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2018 9:52 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2 Hmmmyou DID relocate or rebui

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Todd If you are interested in experimenting, you could try a K2AV folded counterpoise under that inverted L. If installed as recommended, it will provide a decent counterpoise system. One advantage to the FCP is that it is possible to also end fed the system, should that be a requirement. I

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Hi Rob, You ask some good questions and make some interesting observations. Nope, it is the same radial system. I don't have a reasonable way (time/money/effort) to create a whole new 50-60 wire buried radial system for this experiment. I just disconnected the 43' vertical from the radial

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Hmmmyou DID relocate or rebuild your ground system so it converges on a point below the bottom of the 100 foot tall wire right? I mean, you aren't using the 43 foot vert. ground system with the 100' wire? A series fed vertical isn't rocket science so let's not over think this. If it doesn't

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Goins , TopBand List Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Problem #1. The swr indicates about a 140Khz plus < 2:1 bandwidth (2 * 1880-1810) which implies a high radial resistance. Are the eleva

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Exactly! You have a lot of loss in your ground (or something), Todd. Perhaps it's the lack of a proper feedline choke. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Sat, Dec 29, 2018, 11:00 AM Grant Saviers wrote: > Problem #1. The swr indicates about a 140Khz plus < 2:1 bandwidth (2 * > 1880-1810) which implies

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 8:59 AM Grant Saviers wrote: > Problem #1. The swr indicates about a 140Khz plus < 2:1 bandwidth (2 * > 1880-1810) which implies a high radial resistance. Are the elevated > radials fully insulated from trees, not contacting foliage, etc? Add > three more. > Problem #2.

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Problem #1. The swr indicates about a 140Khz plus < 2:1 bandwidth (2 * 1880-1810) which implies a high radial resistance. Are the elevated radials fully insulated from trees, not contacting foliage, etc? Add three more. Problem #2. Your coiled coax choke may be making things worse. Check

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Those SWR readings seem to indicate a very large bandwidth, to the extent it might suggest that your ground resistance losses are swamping the antenna R radiation resistance. It would be nice to know the R value at resonance, where there is no J value. Too bad the analyzer is overloading. A

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

A person emailed me to ask if I could take SWR readings at the rig without a tuner. Since my antenna analyzer is non-op due to the AM station nearby. The feedline is about 140' of LMR-240. Here is the indicated SWR at the 7300: 1.810 1.2:1 1.830 1.3:1 1.850 1.5:1 1.870 1.8:1 1.900 2.3:1 1.940

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Hi Mike, Oh, I would totally believe that the air-wound choke is ineffective at 160m. It just happens to be what I had available to use when I rigged up the elevated radials in the cold rain yesterday. I figured I'd put it in line just in case. Thanks for the choke links, I will read the info on

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Hi Todd, I'll bet the farm (if I had one) that your air-core choke is ineffective. Take at look at http://www.karinya.net/g3txq/chokes to see what I mean. A very, very good common mode choke is the one I have on mine, from http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf. There is no better material

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Sorry, I wasn't completely clear in my post. The elevated radials are not connected to the buried radial field. They are two separate entities. Now the elevated radials do sit above or cross some the buried radials in some places so I'm sure they do interact but they aren't directly connected

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Hello Grant, Your advice is spot-on! Elevated radials MUST NOT be connected to ground. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why Todd's inverted-L is working so poorly. Another important thing is to have a GOOD choke balun right at the feedpoint. *We need to keep the current off of the feedline

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Modeling I've done shows it a bad idea to have in ground and elevated radials connected together, but that is not clear from what you described. Then with the elevated separate, moving the feedpoint up at least 8', to 12' is better and elevated radials run out at that height. I think it is a

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

that you can tell someone is calling. K9ZO From: Topband on behalf of Todd Goins Sent: Friday, December 28, 2018 5:35:53 PM To: TopBand List Subject: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2 I originally started this thread and I want to once again

Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

I originally started this thread and I want to once again thank everyone who provided input and advise both privately and on the reflector. So the 100' tall vertical with the 30' horizontal loading wire works **horribly**. I have about a week with it now every evening and it is much, much poorer

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

want, but the SAL phasing system is complicated and it is > impractical to phase two SAL to increase RDF. > > 73 > JC > N4IS > -Original Message- > From: Topband On Behalf Of Wes Stewart > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2018 10:50 AM > To: Arthur Delibert ; Jeff Wo

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Delibert ; Jeff Woods Cc: topband Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question I was an early participant in the SAL yahoo group and introduced Dan, AC6LA, to the group. He has provided a lot of modeling tools. That said, I lost interest after feeling that the design was too complicated

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

I was an early participant in the SAL yahoo group and introduced Dan, AC6LA, to the group.  He has provided a lot of modeling tools. That said, I lost interest after feeling that the design was too complicated, not well understood and suffered from a dizzying number of changes.  I could be

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

It’s fun chasing pirates. I had an SAL-30...worked great for BCB dxing. Not sure what’s up at my place but I haven’t found an RX antenna yet that hears any better on 160 than my inverted L. Used K9AY, SAL-30, BOG no avail...can’t get to the next layer. Won’t give up though. Cecil K5DL Sent

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Shortwave broadcasting in 2018?! I thought there was hardly any English SW stations left, no? 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 5:16 PM Arthur Delibert wrote: > ... I was able to put up a SAL-12, and I love it. (I do mostly 49-, 60- > and 90-meter SWBC DX.) ... KB3FJO > >

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

: Topband: Inverted L improvement question Jeff, et.al. 1) Yes, I am on 1.7 acres (2 AC - easements). Some guys would love this much land, to farmers it's just enough room for the barn. Regardless, considering I also have a house, a tower and a vertical antenna to share it with, I don't have

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Jeff, et.al. 1)  Yes, I am on 1.7 acres (2 AC - easements).  Some guys would love this much land, to farmers it's just enough room for the barn.  Regardless, considering I also have a house, a tower and a vertical antenna to share it with, I don't have room for Beverages, at least not an

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Wes, A sure sign that your RX antennas are good enough is when DX stations that are Q5 copy repeatedly CQ in your face.  What Mike's saying is true; trying to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear that is a TX vertical is a losing game.  Waller Flags, K9AYs, EWEs, etc. are all cheap and can

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

How about a Waller flag? Better than a Beverage, since you can rotate it! Search for *Waller* or *Waller flag* in the Topband archives. Lots of information there, with a link to the N4IS page about them. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Sat, Dec 22, 2018, 4:20 PM Wes Stewart wrote: > I just drove

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Hello Wes,     I tried 160 back in the early 70's when my brother was active from CO and we skedded on weekends. I used a long wire about 650 ft long for both TX and RX.  Working Europe was special with that setup.  I had a 75A4 RX and a t-368 RF deck with 1000 volts on the 4-400 to net me 80

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

I just drove down to the local convenience store and bought some Powerball tickets.  If I win, there's a nice 80 acre parcel across the street from me that I would buy.  Until then, I'm stuck on a 1.7 acre plot with no room for beverages. Wes  N7WS On 12/22/2018 1:20 PM, Mike Waters wrote:

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Hi Wes, Once you try a Beverage, you'll realize that those antennas weren't hearing the weak ones that called you. ;-) See http://www.w0btu.com/Beverage_antennas.html. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Sat, Dec 22, 2018, 8:05 AM Wes Stewart wrote: > Although licensed for 60 years I'm a relative newby

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Although licensed for 60 years I'm a relative newby on topband.  (I did work VE7 in 1959 but that's another story).  I decided to semi-seriously take up the band to acquire my 9th DXCC band award. As I've described before, pardon the redundancy, I worked my first 70 entities using an

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

If your inverted L is any good at all it will suck as a receiving antenna. This is one of the key things to accept about medium wave but many casual 160 m. operators can't wrap their heads around it. A flame throwing tx antenna will probably have a completely unacceptable noise level on

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Inverted L improvement question Hello, Yes, I'm a 160m newbie but have been licensed and active since 1990. I have CW/Phone experience on HF but I'm just getting my feet wet on 160m. I participated in the ARRL 160 CW contest and had a great time. I

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

So, Mirko brings up an interesting point. I can run out far more than 35' horizontally. Should I make the wire a lot longer in that dimension? I was working with the 130' (approx) total length I'd read about using for the 43' vertical's top loading wire. I know, I should be modeling this myself.

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

L 70' vertical 100' sloping away horizontally fed with series cap against about 40 radials of unknown pedigree) -Original Message- From: Todd Goins Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:07 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question Hi Gary

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Hello Todd, my experiences were pretty limited, but I would suggest you about 150' of wire (to 100' height, the rest horizontally), with air variable capacitor in series with the wire to cancel inductive reactance. Some 500 - 800 pF would be OK, It will tune antenna nicely without any need for

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Hi Gary, Thanks for the help. I got the new wire in place roughly as you described. It is a few feet lower to give good clearance from the anchoring branch. It doesn't work very well. Last night it was much poorer on receive and transmit than my existing 43' vertical setup. I'm not sure what to

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Mt 2 pence is I'd do the vertical wire to the 100' limb and if possible, get the remaining 30 or so feet out as horizontal as possible to make an inverted L, you have a nice vertical component with 100'. I have a sloper using a radial bed somewhat like yours and it works very nicely. I

Topband: Inverted L improvement question

Hello, Yes, I'm a 160m newbie but have been licensed and active since 1990. I have CW/Phone experience on HF but I'm just getting my feet wet on 160m. I participated in the ARRL 160 CW contest and had a great time. I will also be particiapating in the Stew and the CQ contests in January. I'd

Topband: Inverted L trap concoction

I used to operate every year in the ARRL 160 contest starting in about 1975. Tried every kind of short ground mounted vertical (less than 35 ft) devised by man over a pretty extensive radial system I buried when the lot was just dirt. Also shunt feeding the 35 ft tower, loaded sloper off the

Topband: Inverted L antenna with mfj 926 antenna tuner at base of antenna

_ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Inverted L successes

rom: "garyk9gs" <garyk...@wi.rr.com> To: <topband@contesting.com> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 5:15 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L successes > But being 800+ miles closer to EU (many countries there compared to North > America) and a path that is largely ov

Re: Topband: Inverted L successes

MT-06:00) To: GaryK9GS <garyk...@wi.rr.com>, > topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L successes > Most of LI is glacial sand and only the coastal areas benefit verticals. > > Carl > > > - Original Message - > From: "GaryK9GS" <

Re: Topband: Inverted L successes

GMT-06:00) To: GaryK9GS <garyk...@wi.rr.com>, topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L successes Most of LI is glacial sand and only the coastal areas benefit verticals. Carl - Original Message - From: "GaryK9GS" <garyk...@wi.rr.com> To: <topba

Re: Topband: Inverted L successes

As the real estate people say, "Location, location, location." Wes N7WS On 8/28/2017 3:22 PM, jayb1...@optonline.net wrote: Last fall I installed an “S-9” 43 ft vertical, added a tapped loading coil at the base, with 10 on-the-ground radials about 100 ft long randomly run all over my 60x90

Re: Topband: Inverted L successes

I suspect that your success is largely due to your location on Long Island.  73, Gary K9GS Original message From: jayb1...@optonline.net Date: 8/28/17 5:22 PM (GMT-06:00) To: Doug Ellmore <d...@ellmore.net>, topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L suc

Re: Topband: Inverted L successes

Last fall I installed an “S-9” 43 ft vertical, added a tapped loading coil at the base, with 10 on-the-ground radials about 100 ft long randomly run all over my 60x90 house plot. Rig is 300 watts - Started on 160 DXCC with 32 entities, finished DXCC in one winter season. My secret: JT65

Topband: Inverted L successes

I moved to a sloping Inverted L last fall when I only had 17 countries confirmed on DXCC. Initially the base had three 56' ground radials and was fed 40' from my tower. The diagonally placed vertical sloped up towards the base of my Navassa5 yagi at 40', then horizontal toward a tree. I

Re: Topband: Inverted L Radials

My planned inverted L has morphed a bit ... I modeled it – it is planned as a 95 – 100’ vertical section (depends on the amount of droop I can remove from a ~400’ line from the top guy ring at 122’ to a tree that is about 45’ high – spaced about 100’ from the tower) ... I found that the angle

Re: Topband: Inverted L Radials

match, no parts required.  Many 40M shortened yagis use this method.   73, Drew K3PA   -- Message: 6 Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 16:53:53 -0800 From: Grant Saviers <gran...@pacbell.net> To: james soto <kp...@yahoo.com>, Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject:

Re: Topband: Inverted L Radials

As you were disconnecting the radials the ground losses were increasing until it got to enough ohms and you had a good match at 50ohms. My 160 T matches 25 ohms 1.12:1 at 1812Khz and is fed with a 50:25 transmission line transformer. With 8x 125' elevated radials the N6LF research shows I

Re: Topband: Inverted L Radials

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:59 PM, james soto via Topband < topband@contesting.com> wrote: > i proceed to disconnect the radials from the groundrod and just leave the > ground portion of the coax attach to the ground rod and the reading wasSWR > 1.2 and 50 ohms. are this normal ? Yup, and some

Re: Topband: Inverted L Radials

This is normal, but without the radials your RF is  mostly heating up the earth.   If you make the L a little longer, then insert a variable capacitor at the feed point, you should be able to find a higher feed point with the radials connected..   With trial and error 'juggling' the extra

Topband: Inverted L Radials

Hi allLast year i install an inverted L antenna for 160 with few radials different lenght.ohms was between 20 to 25 ohms and swr about 2.2 . This past weekend i was checking thethe antenna with the mfj analyser and i proceed to disconnect the radials from the groundrod and just leave the ground

Re: Topband: Inverted L off tower?

Jim I put up a 70 foot tower (Tashjian DX-70) with a SteppIR DB-36 Yagi about 5 feet above it last year. I hung an IAC "Double Bazooka" Inverted L on it with 3 to 4 foot yardarm at the top of the tower. The tower is on the highest peak of my property and none of the pine trees are high

Re: Topband: Inverted L off tower?

Thanks for all the feedback and suggestions. My friend (not me...) is considering his options. 73 jim ab3cv On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Jim Miller wrote: > One of my friends is thinking about installing a 70 ft. tower with a > 2-element shortened 40M yagi. He is

Re: Topband: Inverted L off tower?

This may not be required if you do a three or 4 wire cage feed as the cage does most of the radiation and essential shields the coax and rotor cable wires just as running them inside. On 5/23/2016 8:26 AM, Jon Zaimes wrote: and run all cabling from the bottom and inside the tower whether

Re: Topband: Inverted L off tower?

Of Jim Miller Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 7:41 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Inverted L off tower? One of my friends is thinking about installing a 70 ft. tower with a 2-element shortened 40M yagi. He is thinking about installing the new tower in a location where he now has a vertical

Re: Topband: Inverted L height vs. length.

Hi Mike, from your description, I think you would be best off not to fold back the top wire, but try to go away horizontally as much as possible. Folding back in U manner makes the current/radiation from the top half cancel portion from the fed portion. If you want to enhance vertical

Re: Topband: Inverted L height vs. length.

Hi Thanks Yuri. That's good info to know. I had wondered about that actually... I may be able to get the hz portion over to a far away tree, just slightly lower than the 35' peak of the first tree, instead of sloping it back to earth. I am limited in what I can do, hi ! Appreciate the

Re: Topband: Inverted L height vs. length.

24 hours and even not one comment? What if I had a BOG for RX, buried, uninsulated radials and had worked K1N with it during my move into a Brave New World? Maybe I really should've said I was renting the station out for hire to offshore stns only, to be used to work rare countries, during

Re: Topband: Inverted L height vs. length.

I have used one inverted L and the horses wiped it out a few years ago. I had about 70 ft of vertical and the rest horizontal. I am not sure how much interaction the tree will have if you run the wire next to it. The end sloping down will affect the match if my memory serves. If that is

Re: Topband: Inverted L height vs. length.

I can speculate that your mail box would be overflowing and you could retire comfortably especially if you had a 160m station that worked. Sri Tom, I couldn't resist having some fun. Doug -Original Message- 24 hours and even not one comment? Maybe I really should've said I was renting

Topband: Inverted L height vs. length.

de VE9AA I know inverted L's have been hashed out quite a few times on this list, and I have gleaned some knowledge. At my previous QTH I had a 5/16th WL one which seemed to work tons better than my current one, even though I was not up over 40' high. As it happens, on my current property

Re: Topband: Inverted-L with coil on the top of the vertical section

: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 2:30 AM To: Adrian Fabry Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted-L with coil on the top of the vertical section Ady - you might consider using a Folded CounterPoise, designed by K2AV, for your radial system. I have one on each of my Inverted L

Re: Topband: Inverted-L with coil on the top of the vertical section

You didn't say how long the horizontal portion of your inverted-L was. If we knew that, that would help us help you. :-) FWIW, W1BB himself said that an inverted-L could have a vertical section of only 25 feet, and still be worthwhile. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com/160_meters.html#inv-l_antenna On

Topband: Inverted-L with coil on the top of the vertical section

Hello all, I'd like to build an Inverted-L antenna. Unfortunately the vertical section will be only 8m (26 ft) high and the radial system not great (maybe 5 to 10 wires laying on the ground) The simulation (with MMANA software) indicate 3.5 +j0 Ohm impedance. This is very low so I think most

Re: Topband: Inverted-L with coil on the top of the vertical section

Ady - you might consider using a Folded CounterPoise, designed by K2AV, for your radial system. I have one on each of my Inverted L antennas; 160 80 meters. They work quite well if you do not have the real estate for a lot of radial wires. My 160 Inverted L only goes up 35-40 feet bit with the

Re: Topband: Inverted-L with coil on the top of the vertical section

On 2015-02-10 14:09, Adrian Fabry wrote: The simulation (with MMANA software) indicate 3.5 +j0 Ohm impedance. This is very low so I think most of the power will be lost in the ground. In order to raise the impedance, I would insert a coil (about 75 uH) on the top of the vertical section and

Re: Topband: Inverted L question

Art, from what I’ve read, I understand that the non-vertical part of the Inverted L does not have to be completely horizontal - it can slope with little detriment to it’s radiation pattern. I have two - one for 80 and one for 160. Both of ‘em slope away from the top support. Jim / W6JHB On

Re: Topband: Inverted L question

The most important part of an inverted L is the counterpoise, be it raised radials, buried or on-ground radials or an FCP. Be sure you can do a counterpoise well. Otherwise the counterpoise can be a huge RF loss, easily negating anything done well with the L wire itself. Next the vertical part of

Topband: Inverted L question

I have been looking at locations on my property to install an Inverted L for 160. How important is it for the top part to be led away at a right angle? I was considering running it vertically 80ft, then about 25 feet at a 45 degree up angle and 25 feet at a 45 degree down angle, over the top of

Topband: Inverted L

What interaction between a Inverted L and 80 40 meter dipoles off the same tower ? Don W4DEE _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Inverted L

There will be some interaction. How much? All depends. You can get some idea by modeling with EZNEC. The tower can have some effect too. Glenn KD0Q On 1/30/2015 11:55, Don wrote: What interaction between a Inverted L and 80 40 meter dipoles off the same tower ? Don W4DEE

Re: Topband: Inverted L

- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of KD0Q-Glenn Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 7:13 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L There will be some interaction. How much? All depends. You can get some idea by modeling with EZNEC. The tower

Re: Topband: inverted L issues

but this is the way it works. Good luck. 73 de YO3FFF Cristi From: ALEXEY OGORODOV ua4...@mail.ru To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 4:37 AM Subject: Topband: inverted L issues Hello, Right to the point.  At HD2A we installed

Re: Topband: inverted L issues

Alex wrote; what could cause the SWR increment? Water in the coax perhaps? Steve, KK7UV _ Topband Reflector

Topband: inverted L issues

Hello, Right to the point.  At HD2A we installed an Inverted L with the following dimensions: vertical portion 16m horizontal portion 26m. The horizontal wire goes with slightly upward with with its end at 19m above the gound. The ground system - 4 x 6ft ground rods at the base                

Re: Topband: Inverted L question

On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ashton Lee ashton.r@hotmail.com wrote: Several of us here in Western Colorado run slopers off the tower, which I believe is essentially loading the tower with an elevated lead. It works for us. Sloper is really not the same thing as a parallel vertical

Re: Topband: Inverted L question

- Original Message - From: Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com To: Herb Krumich wa2...@yahoo.com; topband@contesting.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 3:08 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L question I am right now using an inverted L which is spaced about 4 feet away from my tower

Re: Topband: Inverted L question

On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote: At any distance less than 1/4 wave or so, which is around 130 feet, the inverted L is coupled very tightly to the tower. At wider spacings, like 50-100 feet, the tower and things on the tower **sometimes** won't have much

Re: Topband: Inverted L question

Snip: I am right now using an inverted L which is spaced about 4 feet away from my tower. The vertical leg is about 85 feet. I remember a number of years ago talking with Jeff Briggs (K1ZM) about ideas for my first inverted-L while we were both waiting for flights out of the Dayton Hamvention.

Topband: Inverted l or 4 square?

If I can support a wire antenna at 50' or maybe more in tall pine trees and have 1.9 acres of space to use which would work best. Lots of tall pine trees on the lot. I assume the trees in the center of the square will really not be an interfearing factor. If I feed with window line will it

Topband: Inverted L + FCP Report

Inverted L + FCP Report (December 2, 2012) Over the last approx. 20 Years I have operated in quite a few 160 contests from my city lot situated on a mountain side on rocky poor soil in North Vancouver BC which is located in the south west corner of the province. I have tried many different

Re: Topband: Inverted L + FCP Report

... and I ditto this! Worked better then previous Tees and L's with 32 radials for me. My L goes up 65' and the remainder of the 150' straight out. Worked perfect 1st shot, no trimming. Length was recommended by Guy! T U Guy K2AV! 73 de NS9I On 12/2/2012 7:47 PM, Markus Hansen wrote:

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

The inverted L loads just fine to about 700 watts and then causes the Alpha amp to fault out. I think I am getting a sudden change in antenna impedance. The antenna is fed through a 5 KW rated choke balun. The feed line exits the base between radials. Remove the balun.  It's not doing

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

The sloper loads fine all the way up to 1500 watts. The inverted L loads just fine to about 700 watts and then causes the Alpha amp to fault out. I think I am getting a sudden change in antenna impedance. The antenna is fed through a 5 KW rated choke balun. The feed line exits the base between

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

The sloper loads fine all the way up to 1500 watts. The inverted L loads just fine to about 700 watts and then causes the Alpha amp to fault out. I think I am getting a sudden change in antenna impedance. The antenna is fed through a 5 KW rated choke balun. The feed line exits the base

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

through a 3 inch  diameter branch. So there is a possibility this might be the problem depending on how your wire is routed. 73  Jack --- On Tue, 11/27/12, Ashton Lee ashton.r@hotmail.com wrote: From: Ashton Lee ashton.r@hotmail.com Subject: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ??? To: topband

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

Ash, You said, I've replaced every component in the system except for the antenna wire. Also, if the antenna wire is (or is partly) an insulated variety, it is possible to have an open fault inside a good exterior insulation. Charles - N5UL Hobbs, NM

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

Remove the balun. It's not doing anything for your and is a potential source of loss and problems. Coaxial cable is unbalanced, as is a ground-fed inverted L. No need for a balun. Unfortunately, that is not a universally true statement. MOST antennas are in a neither world of being neither

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

Ok, everyone thanks for all the help. I rebuilt the antenna from new wire, built a two insulator termination at the end of the horizontal section where the high voltage is, I rehung the new antenna so that it doesn't touch anything… and the problem persisted. I then looked into Tom W8JI's

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

Tom: MOST antennas are in a neither world of being neither perfectly balanced nor perfectly unbalanced. How about an inverted L longer than 1/4 wave but optimized with series capacitor? Any closer to perfect unbalanced? Bob VE7BS ___ Topband

Re: Topband: Inverted L SWR Jumps ???

On 11/27/2012 10:45 PM, Tim Duffy K3LR wrote: There is significant coupling between 160 meter antennas that are separated by as much as 500 feet YES! and this coupling could be problem for your set up. But it can also be a good thing if you know what you have and how to take advantage of

<    1   2   3   >