Interesting question Mike!

Possibly, however my focus was to achieve maximum gain with minimal
effort. This direction allowed me to accomplish that objective.

Don't know if anyone has documented experience in doing what you pose. I
would certainly be interested in reading the work anyone conducted along
that line for amateur use. Would be interesting.

73 Joel W5ZN


> Could you not get more out those elements if you had phased them? 
> Obviously there would be more work required for the phasing system.  
> One element short of a 4 square.
>
>
> On 2/1/2018 6:01 PM, Joel Harrison wrote:
>> As Tim noted I built the K3LR version of the 3 element parasitic array
>> this past fall. I used my original and existing shunt fed tower as the
>> driven element. It is switchable in four directions and I have an
>> extensive radial system (120 radials)under each element.
>>
>> My initial assessment indicates a forward gain of around 5 dB and a
>> minimum F/B of 25 dB. It performs very well from out here in fly over
>> country.
>>
>> I am in the process of completing a paper detailing my construction and
>> experience with the array and will also be presenting this at the Dayton
>> Antenna Forum on Friday of Dayton.
>>
>> I have spent the past 10 years improving my 160 meter RX systems here at
>> W5ZN and had reached a point of needing to improve the TX system beyond
>> a
>> single shunt fed tower. I struggled with whether to build a stand alone
>> 4
>> square for 160 meters however the appeal of the parasitic array is that
>> I
>> could use the existing shunt fed tower to support the T elements without
>> having to erect an entirely new mechanical structure for a 4 square
>> while
>> achieving basically the same result. I have been pleased with the
>> performance for the short few months it has been in operation.
>>
>> Obviously it doesn't provide the broad bandwidth a 4 square does. I have
>> about 40 KHz between 1.5:1 points however in reality a 4 square has
>> limited bandwidth since beyond the resonant points you dump a lot of
>> power
>> into the dump load!
>>
>> 73 Joel W5ZN
>>
>>
>>> I have been using a 3 element parasitic vertical beam on 160 for at
>>> least
>>> 20
>>> years. K9CT, NR5M, AA1K*, VE3EJ and most recently W5ZN have the same
>>> array.
>>> It has instant switching in 4 directions.
>>>
>>> With 4 parasitic cut directors around the center driven element tower -
>>> it
>>> is pretty easy to get over 5 dB of forward gain (over 40 KHz wide) and
>>> over
>>> 30 dB of front to back (over a narrow bandwidth). Easy driven element
>>> match
>>> with an L network at the base. Each parasitic has 3 modes. Director,
>>> Reflector or float. Going from directional to Omni is easy as well.
>>>
>>> *AA1K has an additional director toward Europe. So he has 4 elements!
>>>
>>> As was pointed out - the magic in any vertical antenna is all about the
>>> radials. Each parasitic wire (4) and the center driven element tower
>>> has
>>> 120
>>> radials that are 130 feet long (unless they cross the junction bus). I
>>> have
>>> 67,000 feet of radials under my 160 array.
>>>
>>> I use a 120 ft 24 inch face solid leg tower as the driven element. The
>>> tower
>>> sections are welded together to decrease any joint loss. The parasitic
>>> T
>>> wires are #12 Copperweld.
>>>
>>> The last three editions of the Low Band DXing book describe this
>>> antenna
>>> in
>>> the Yagi chapter.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Tim K3LR
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of W7RH
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 11:39 PM
>>> To: Topband
>>> Subject: Re: Topband: Adding a parasitic reflector to a vertical
>>>
>>> I've played with parasitic elements in antenna arrays for almost three
>>> decades and the current antenna system I have used parasitic elements
>>> both director and reflectors.
>>>
>>> With very careful tuning performance that of a all driven array can be
>>> achieved. Tree is correct they due tend to be somewhat limited in in
>>> bandwidth with relation to F/B ratio. Gain remains fairly constant.
>>>
>>> The tuning procedure that Tree suggested is absolutely correct. You
>>> detune all unused elements and adjust the center frequency of the
>>> parasitic for best F/B one element at a time. Parasitic elements I
>>> might
>>> add are no different than driven and must have extensive ground system
>>> to be effective. No exceptions. You know you have right by F/B ratio.
>>> You can go one step further and measure the actual antenna currents
>>> which I have done. In my system the parasitic elements achieve 80-85%
>>> of
>>> the theoretical current at the base.
>>>
>>> de Bob W7RH
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


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

Reply via email to