Hi Doug,
A few notes about the short verticals in my 160M passive receive array. I use them in my W8JI broadside-endfire passive array described in detail on Tom's home page and on W5ZN's home page. Its important to understand that the loss in the radial system of a 160M passive receive array is of no importance, but variations in the base impedance of the verticals during wet and dry weather could affect the pattern of the array. You don't need many radials, but you do need "enough." I use eight 65 foot radials under each vertical. Several of my verticals are in wetlands that flood during wet weather and the variation in ground conditions under the verticals is unusually severe. I initially used four radials and found there was nearly ten ohms change in the resistive component of the feed point impedance between flooded conditions and extreme dry ground conditions. Four additional radials solved that problem. My radials are simply laid on the surface of the ground. While the deer traffic rearranges the location of the radials, that doesn't seem the affect the performance of the array. I use stranded copper wire, solid wire would easily entrap the legs of the deer. Dozens of deer inhabit the field where my verticals are located. I eliminated deer collisions with the umbrella wires by attaching the ends of bottom ends of the wires to the top of seven foot fence posts (through a porcelain insulator and short length of light rope). I've never had a deer collision since. While some users of short verticals install foundations, I've found it completely unnecessary with guyed (e.g. top loaded) verticals. I simply use a two foot length of one inch diameter rebar. The vertical is attached to a 1.25 inch o.d. aluminum tube that simply slips over the rebar. Rebar is very inexpensive and easy to install an remove and especially convenient for temporary installations like mine 73 Frank W3LPL ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Renwick" <[email protected]> To: "topband" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 3:04:02 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Short receiving verticals question I have used this same setup for my 4-square 160m receive array for years. Since I have to take down and put up this array every spring/fall, I have to re-tune each element for the 160m band. I have found that the base loading does not have to be exact for the system to 'work'. Last year I decided to make inductor substitution box for each element to easily tune each element close to 1.830 MHz. The biggest problem with the top hat is deer catching the wire/string and bending the element or some rodent eating the string. It's amazing how forgiving aluminum tubing is as I can straighten it many times without breaking. At the base I use a 2 ft ground rod and 4 short radials. I found the use of the ground rod makes a large change in the tuning of the element. Doug -----Original Message----- Jon, The reason I use the hats and do everything I do in the elements is bandwidth. Even at my quiet rural location on the quietest hour of the quietest day, almost any element of reasonable height will have more than enough signal level. This is why I base load and use a large hat. While the large hat tends to keep current more uniform throughout the element independent of coil location, and while more uniform current increases radiation resistance, that effect is meaningless to me. The entire goal for me is bandwidth, or a stable SWR vs. frequency. Bandwidth is also why I load the element with a series resistance for matching, instead of a network. I want to "swamp out" or dilute the effects of resonance, minimizing element phase shift vs. frequency change at the element terminals and preventing drastic changes in element feedpoint impedance from mutual coupling between elements. The hat is actually the bulk of the loading, and sets the current distribution. The coil just cancels reactance. Since it is a series network with the inductor forming a series tank with the termination reactance, the lower the reactance used (compared to termination resistance) the larger bandwidth becomes. You want the loading coil to be terminated in the lowest capacitive reactance possible, and that is at the antenna base. Because voltage and current are out-of-phase above the coil, even with high current, the impedance increases. This means the tradeoff in a bottom inductance is increased voltage above the inductor. The antenna is more "loss critical" above the coil for anything coupled via the electric field, including a lossy dielectric. This is a compromise of two things: 1.) Bandwidth 2.) Sensitivity to dielectrics around the element Getting rid of the hat while the element is close to a tree does nothing but bad things to both, but no one can say how much. The last resort for me would be no "hats". Perhaps you can use T elements with loading wires away from foliage that might change tuning or losses? 73 Tom _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband ----- Original Message ----- _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
