Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

[Nick Hall-Patch]

And if you look at US Patent 2,247,743, it 
appears that Harold Beverage conceived of a horizontal Flag around 1941.


best wishes,

Nick


At 21:52 06-09-15, you wrote:
Bruce wrote on Sept 6. Snip < Check it out 
http://www.qsl.net/k4fk/presentations/WF-receiver-antennas-SFDXAs.pdf  
> Bruce, ref to the link above there is a gap 
in the "History of the Flag Antenna" The 
earliest fef. to the Terminate loop  I have 
found is in Keen’s Wireless Direction Finding 
1927 Ed. Page 75. Keen describes a two turn 
resistance terminated loop used by Societe 
Francaicse Radio-Electrique.  It resembles the 
K9AY and uses a similar operation to create a 
cardiode. 73 Andrew Ikin G8LUG _ 
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband



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

Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

[Arthur Delibert]

Tom --

You asked for the source of the statement about a Waller flag needing 40 dB of 
preamplification.  See 

http://www.kkn.net/dayton2011/N4ISWallerFlag.pdf

at pages 6 and 7.

-- Art, KB3FJO



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

Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

[Jim Brown]

I find them at hamfests, typically for a buck apiece. I've also seen 
suggestions that they can be found at thrift shops.


73, Jim K9YC

On Mon,9/7/2015 5:08 AM, James Rodenkirch wrote:
Any suggestions, Jim, on where to find small, inexpensive linear 
supplies to replace the wall warts? 


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

Topband: Waller Flag Question

[Paul Christensen]

> "I've replaced all of the SMPS blocks that came in my door with vintage 

linear supplies (and some are vintage linear supplies float-charging 

sealed lead acid batteries. 73, Jim K9YC"

 

Same here.  For wall-mounted power supplies, Jameco has an excellent
selection of regulated and non-regulated linear wall supplies.  Prices
typically range between USD $10 - $15.  All wall-mount SMPS in my house have
been replaced with these.   Jameco sells both SMPS and linear types so be
careful with your selection.  For higher current, look to their selection of
linear desktop blocks.  These are the type with cabling on both ends of the
block that are similar to the style used on laptop PCs.

 

Despite my dislike for Anderson Powerpole (APP) connectors, I do use them as
an in-line adapter if the supplied connector at the end of the new wall
supply is not the same as required on the appliance (e.g., 2.1 mm where
2.5mm is needed)  - or if the appliance is hard-wired to the supply.  I find
it more convenient to use the APP as an in-line splice than solder a new
coaxial DC connector on the cable end.

 

For even higher current in the 5A-15A class, consider open-frame, linear OEM
supplies from PowerOne, Condor, and International Power, available on-line
through Mouser and other industrial suppliers of electronic components.
These supplies require your own AC input cabling and fuse protection. 

 

Paul, W9AC

 

 

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

Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

[Jim Brown]

On Mon,9/7/2015 3:31 AM, Arthur Delibert wrote:

You asked for the source of the statement about a Waller flag needing 40 dB of 
preamplification.  See

http://www.kkn.net/dayton2011/N4ISWallerFlag.pdf


I saw that statement as well, which noted a gain of -53 dBi. My NEC 
model, using Carlos's dimensions over lousy soil, computes -44 dBi with 
a peak at 24 degrees.


73, Jim K9YC
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

[JC]

Art

I don't know where this coming from ,but the gain you need for a VWF modest
size is 20db for vertical polarization and for horizontal HWF you need 40db
on 160m, on 80m divide this by 2, you need only 20 dB  and on 40m 10 dB a
NORTON preamp is enough. All situations you need a band pass filter.

The WF change gain with high above ground but the RDF and  elevation angle
does not change, only the gain change, for 160m, changing the antenna height
120 ft. to 90 ft. the gain drops 2 dB, from 90 to 60 the gain drops 3 dB
more, and from 60 to 30 ft. 5 dB more, do for 160m HWF at 120ft the gain
drops 10 dB for a 30 ft. high HWF. 

KD9SV sells a preamplifier that I recommend, it is special designed for
WF's, check DXE page.

You can check some WF results on Doug page, NX4D. I heard over 295 countries
since 2006 using WF's, Doug heard over 300 and worked 295 on 160 since 2003,
both of us live in subdivisions and we use a 40 dB gain preamp with tuned
input and band pass filters after it.

http://nx4d10.wix.com/waller-flag

Detuning the tower or TX vertical antenna is  a " MUST " for VWF. Not a
problem for HWV. Inverter V also needs to be detuned in both cases. I
recommend don't waste your time if detuning is not on top of you to-do list.

Remove common node noise with chokes should be the second on the list,
Antenna and preamp is the last thing to get going.

Regards
JC
N4IS 

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Arthur
Delibert
Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2015 1:40 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: Waller Flag Question

The on-line materials about Waller Flags says that a modest size WF would
need about 40 dB of gain to boost the signal to a usable level.  One of the
postings says that cascading two preamps of 20 dB each seems to add extra
noise, and they talk about developmental work being done on a single preamp
of 40 dB.  

Is there now such a 40 dB preamp?  Is it made commercially?  Alternatively,
are there plans on-line somewhere?  Has someone actually used it in a
high-RF urban/suburban area, with multiple 50 kW AM BC stations?  With what
results?

Many thanks.

Art Delibert
KB3FJO
  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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

Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

[JC]

>>
At -140 dBm and 250 Hz noise bandwidth, the system would require a 1 dB
noise figure front end.  That's about 35 deg K noise temperature.
>>>
 
Tom is as usual 100% right, the RX system gain should be near 1 dB, it means
the preamp at 1.8 MHz should be .5 dB NF  the input filter and the feed line
< then .5 dB att. Together, not each. 
 

To  make things more complicated, when there is no atmospheric noise, like
we have in some winter days, the band noise can drop to 100K, and at that
point the gain of the WF and the NF of the system should be designed to  no
more than 3 dB deterioration  on signal to noise ratio, it means the 1 dB is
not enough, the solution for that is a bigger WF.

>>
Besides that, if the gain is so far negative the coaxial cable will easily
become more of an antenna than the thing we call an antenna.
<<

This is most common problem for all flag . EWE; WF and low gain antennas.
The only way to overcome this is using good quality twist par UNSHILDED
cable, or choke the cable as  much possible. If you know what you are doing.
However detuning any structure or antenna at the same frequency is a must,
it can deteriorate the directivity of the RX antenna to make it useless. No
free beef here.
>>

40 dB gain in front of a receiver is pure fantasy, unless the receiver is
dead as a door nail.
<<  

Tom,  I'm afraid I disagree but agree with some of  that, I am using a 43dB
gain preamp since 2010 with not a single failure yet, but I understand your
point. It is so delicate to implement that most of fellow that try it fail.
Even aluminum enclosure does not shield it enough, 40 dB gain is 10.000
voltage gain, it needs a dual shield with steel to cut magnetic field, the
feed lines must be decoupled over 80 dB, relays must be 100dB or more in
isolation, and much more details that I won't cover.

It is not a weekend project. 


Regards
JC
N4IS

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

Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

[JC]

Andrew

Very interesting, that is my presentation, but my updated early terminated loop 
reference was from Harold H. Beverage patent applied 1938 and issue 1941 owned 
by RCA

U.S. Patent 2,247,743 Jul 1, 1941 Broadband Uni-directional Shortwave Antenna

http://www.google.com/patents/US2247743?dq=%22harold+h+beverage%22#PPA3,M1

Yes, the HWF is really a Beverage antenna. Hehehe.

Would you send me more information so I can update my History of the Flag 
antenna?

JC
N4IS

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Ikin
Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2015 5:53 PM
To: k...@myfairpoint.net; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

Bruce wrote on Sept 6.

Snip <
Check it out
http://www.qsl.net/k4fk/presentations/WF-receiver-antennas-SFDXAs.pdf  >

Bruce, ref to the link above there is a gap in the "History of the Flag 
Antenna" The earliest fef. to the Terminate loop  I have found is in Keen’s 
Wireless Direction Finding 1927 Ed. Page 75. Keen describes a two turn 
resistance terminated loop used by Societe Francaicse Radio-Electrique.  It 
resembles the K9AY and uses a similar operation to create a cardiode.

73

Andrew Ikin

G8LUG



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

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

Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

[Tom W8JI]

Thank you, JC:

I don't know where this coming from ,but the gain you need for a VWF 
modest
size is 20db for vertical polarization and for horizontal HWF you need 
40db

on 160m, on 80m divide this by 2, you need only 20 dB  and on 40m 10 dB a
NORTON preamp is enough. All situations you need a band pass filter.



20 dB is a realistic gain figure.

The very low sensitivity of horizontal polarization, because at low heights 
in wavelength the earth "shorts the electric field", and because at low 
heights the earth's reflection nulls the antenna peak response, causes great 
difficulty.


If local site noise is high, and if care is taken in balance, the horizontal 
system can be built but 40 dB gain is unlikely to be needed unless the 
receiver is dead.


The reason is pretty simple. Most receivers are in the minus 130-140 dBm 
noise floor range. If you added 40 dB gain to that, the noise figure of the 
required front end would be an impossible negative noise figure in the -20 
dB or more noise figure range. Of course anything less than 1 dB is very 
difficult, and below 1/2 dB starts to be impossible. Even if you obtain that 
noise figure, cable leakages and common mode would overwhelm the low antenna 
level.


20 dB is about the limit for most receivers, although a dead receiver could 
use 40.  If the receiver is stone deaf, 40 dB would allow a workable noise 
figure at the front end.:-)


This low sensitivity is why K6STI's antenna met with such limited reports of 
success.  If the site is very noisy with local distant noise, then the 
antenna's noise floor is high enough to limit system noise floor. Otherwise, 
the cables and input amplifier would set noise floor.


I have a similar thing here with a commercial loop antenna. Even though 
vertically polarized, it is noise limited at my location by internal 
amplifier noise.  Now if I move it into a noisy location, it limits by 
outside noise.


No matter what we try to do, we are not going to have a 0 dB noise figure. 
When we start making the antenna sensitivity so low it requires gain with a 
normal receiver so unrealistic that it limits on the front end noise, it is 
useless. What good would seeing the S meter at S-2 or S-4 from amplifier 
noise do?  That is what the popular commercial loop I have does. In a quiet 
location, it limits on its own internal amplifier noise. Six dB less gain 
does not change S/N ratio one bit.


We should all question systems that need 40dB with normal receivers. 20 dB 
is more rational.


73 Tom 


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

Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

[Jim Brown]

Carlos,

Note that I referred to "horizontally POLARIZED" and "vertically 
POLARIZED" antennas. My comments on, and analysis of, the Waller Flag 
were based on my model of a vertical Waller loop.  A horizontal Waller 
Flag at a height great enough to have useful sensitivity is not even 
close to being practical for me.


Also, that tutorial I cited on horizontal and vertical antennas is 
specifically oriented toward TX performance, where the primary objective 
is usually gain in the direction and elevation of DX rather than RDF.


73, Jim K9YC

On Mon,9/7/2015 5:41 PM, JC wrote:

The concept of horizontal dipole is just a name for a wire parallel to the
ground. If you change the description from TOTAL Field on EZENEC and use
Horizontal and Vertical field your results won't be the same. On low bands
Total Field is just one dimension. Horizontal and Vertical  makes all the
difference in propagation and signal to noise ratio.

JC
N4IS

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2015 5:32 PM
To:topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

On Mon,9/7/2015 1:05 PM, K1FZ-Bruce wrote:

>Thanks Jim,  There are new hams that do not know how horizontal
>antennas patterns change over ground.

Right. In general, horizontally polarized antennas only care about height,
while vertically polarized antennas care SOME about height, but mostly about
soil conductivity. I gave a talk at Pacificon and to a couple of ham clubs
on this based on an extensive NEC modeling study.
Slides are here.


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

Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

[JC]

Jim

The concept of horizontal dipole is just a name for a wire parallel to the
ground. If you change the description from TOTAL Field on EZENEC and use
Horizontal and Vertical field your results won't be the same. On low bands
Total Field is just one dimension. Horizontal and Vertical  makes all the
difference in propagation and signal to noise ratio.

JC
N4IS

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2015 5:32 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

On Mon,9/7/2015 1:05 PM, K1FZ-Bruce wrote:
> Thanks Jim,  There are new hams that do not know how horizontal 
> antennas patterns change over ground.

Right. In general, horizontally polarized antennas only care about height,
while vertically polarized antennas care SOME about height, but mostly about
soil conductivity. I gave a talk at Pacificon and to a couple of ham clubs
on this based on an extensive NEC modeling study. 
Slides are here.

http://k9yc.com/VertOrHorizontal-Slides.pdf

> On 160 meters, Usually, but nor always, higher is better up to 1/2 
> wavelength for low angle DX..
> Lousy soil, like low conductivity sand, dry desert soil, can put the 
> effective conducting ground much lower than the surface soil
>
> DX does not always come in at low angles. Antenna handbooks ARRL, and 
> Low Band DXing books are worth reading.

N6BV's Antenna Book statistical data for use with HFTA are an excellent
resource in that regard, but I think the data for 160M is interpolated from
data for higher frequencies. And yes, the ON4UN book is excellent on that
topic.

73, Jim K9YC
> 73
> Bruce-K1FZ
>
> www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html
>
>
>   I saw that statement as well, which noted a gain of -53 dBi. My 
> NEC model, using Carlos's dimensions over lousy soil, computes -44 dBi 
> with a peak at 24 degrees.
> 73, Jim K9YC
> _
>
>
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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

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

Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

[Jim Brown]

On Mon,9/7/2015 1:05 PM, K1FZ-Bruce wrote:
Thanks Jim,  There are new hams that do not know how horizontal 
antennas patterns change over ground. 


Right. In general, horizontally polarized antennas only care about 
height, while vertically polarized antennas care SOME about height, but 
mostly about soil conductivity. I gave a talk at Pacificon and to a 
couple of ham clubs on this based on an extensive NEC modeling study. 
Slides are here.


http://k9yc.com/VertOrHorizontal-Slides.pdf

On 160 meters, Usually, but nor always, higher is better up to 1/2 
wavelength for low angle DX..
Lousy soil, like low conductivity sand, dry desert soil, can put the 
effective conducting ground much lower than the surface soil


DX does not always come in at low angles. Antenna handbooks ARRL, and 
Low Band DXing books are worth reading.


N6BV's Antenna Book statistical data for use with HFTA are an excellent 
resource in that regard, but I think the data for 160M is interpolated 
from data for higher frequencies. And yes, the ON4UN book is excellent 
on that topic.


73, Jim K9YC

73
Bruce-K1FZ

www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html


  I saw that statement as well, which noted a gain of -53 dBi. My NEC
model, using Carlos's dimensions over lousy soil, computes -44 dBi with
a peak at 24 degrees.
73, Jim K9YC
_



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


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

Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

[K1FZ-Bruce]

Thanks Jim,  There are new hams that do not know how horizontal 
antennas patterns change over ground. On 160 meters, Usually, but nor 
always, higher is better up to 1/2 wavelength for low angle DX.. 
 
Lousy soil, like low conductivity sand, dry desert soil, can put the 
effective conducting ground much lower than the surface soil

 
DX does not always come in at low angles. Antenna handbooks ARRL, and 
Low Band DXing books are worth reading. 
 

73
Bruce-K1FZ
 
www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html
 

  I saw that statement as well, which noted a gain of -53 dBi. My NEC
model, using Carlos's dimensions over lousy soil, computes -44 dBi with
a peak at 24 degrees. 


73, Jim K9YC
_
 


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

Re: Topband: Waller Flag Question

[JC]

"" A similar observation was made 20 years ago by Brian Beezley, K6STI, in a
QST article titled "A Receiving Antenna that Rejects Local Noise" 
(September, 1995, page 33):  I've been looking around for something that
might work better than my present antenna, and I see good reports about the
Waller flag from people who are actually using it.  So I'll give it a try
and see how well the theory matches up with actual practice.  That's what
ham radio is all about -- no? 

Here one of the last understood subject on radio and antenna work, most of
all paper about  antenna. RF and propagation on MF and low band are valid
only for vertical signals. 

For horizontal signal there is a major difference in the way Fields interact
with Matter. If are an Engineer or someone that wants to give a try I
recommend the book Electromagnetic Waves and Radiation Systems  Edward C
Jordan and Keith G Balmain  page 277 Chapter 9  and 372 Chapter 11 Antenna
fundaments.

There is no horizontal signal near the ground, there is no ground waive or
surface waive near the ground. So any or all manmade noise only can
propagate by vertical surface waive or ground waive. 

Increasing the directivity of the RX antenna you can increase signal do
noise ration my the same directivity gain. However is you turn the antenna
horizontal the attenuation on vertical propagated noises is huge!.

A low dipole on 160m,as example,  does not receive any horizontal signal!,
the only useful signal arrives vertical in the direction of the wire, same
case of beverage antenna. 

Check the excellent article by Kai KE4PT on QEX and QST about best high for
horizontal antennas. You will see that near the ground the attenuating is
severe near 4 decay's.

http://www.arrl.org/files/file/QEX_Next_Issue/May-Jun_2011/QEX_5_11_Siwiak.p
df

Using the antenna as polarization filter is the only solution to increase
signal do noise ratio in urban areas.

PY2XB lives downtown S Paulo, Fred is using WF for low bands and when he
detunes his inverted V the noise on the WF drops 2S unis on 80m. 

Tom is right about the 40 db gain, gain  means nothing, the NF of the system
is the only thing the matters.
Decrease your RF gain and increase the AF gain  that you will hear better
than most preamp's can help.

N4IS
JC



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

Re: Topband: Waller Flag Preamp

[Dennis W0JX via Topband]

Guys,
Gary, KD9SV, has developed a very good 40 db preamp just for the Waller Flag 
that covers both 160 and 80M bands.

73, Dennis W0JX

--- On Sat, 9/5/15, kd9sv  wrote:

> From: kd9sv 
> Subject: RE: Topband: Waller Flag
> To: "'Dennis W0JX'" 
> Date: Saturday, September 5, 2015, 7:44 PM
> Dennis, in case you have
> an interest in building a WF I have a new preamp
> especially for that type of antenna...80/160
> with adjustable gain and max of
> 40db and it
> is "rock solid" with absolutely no tendencies
> toward
> oscillations...73, have a good
> season, de gary
> 
> The picture
> is with shield removed which normally covers the 5
> FET's
> 
> -Original
> Message-
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com]
> On Behalf Of Dennis
> W0JX via Topband
> Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2015 6:57 PM
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: Waller Flag
> 
> The Waller Flag is a very good
> TB RX antenna. Most of the time it is
> installed in the vertical plane as it was
> originally developed and is made
> rotatable.
> It can be as low as 20 feet off the ground although some are
> put
> on taller towers. N4IS has also
> developed a horizontal version, basically
> the same antenna, to respond to horizontally
> polarized signals. However, the
> antenna
> needs to be quite high to be effective, at least 70 feet
> and
> preferably up at 90 to 100 feet to work
> well.
> 
> 73, Dennis
> W0JX
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> 
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband