Re: Topband: Radials, EZNEC and far field

[Artek Manuals]

Soil conductivity plays a much bigger role than most of us realize and 
the "over salt water" is the gold standard`. As noted by a few other 
respondents radials are certainly helpful but for those of who live on 
quartz plains (sand) far from the ocean the far field losses can not be 
totally overcome by copper plating your yard in a 130ft circle




Dave
NR1DX



On 12/19/2022 5:50 PM, Ignacy Misztal wrote:

Do more radials on a 160m vertical bring more improvements than shown
by simulation?

Most simulations, e.g. by EZNEC, show that going above 32 radials on 160m
brings minimal improvement, say 1 db to 2 max. Even for low angle signals.

On the other hand, some really loud stations on 160m, that are 5-10 db 
above

the crowd, use a massive amount of radials. This is for inland stations,
far away from salt water.

Is there any discrepancy between modeling by EZNEC and real life
performance with the number of radials? Does adding radials beyond 32 help
much for low angles?

Any real story?

I have a shunt-fed 100 ft tower with 36 100ft radials. It is vastly
inferior to a 40 ft high inv L with 1 radial by salt water that hears DX
loud 2 hrs before the sunset. I am wondering whether by expanding to 50
200ft radials would narrow the difference.

Ignacy NO9E
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: J28MD, conditions

[Artek Manuals]

I see this as a two sided coin

160 and 80 tough bands for CW let alone SSB. In the end it is a signal 
to noise problem. Which FT8 overcomes by several dB.   FT8 levels the 
playing field for those of us who don't have the money for a mega 
station on several acres with 100 ft towers,etc (not knocking those guys 
if I win the lottery it will be near the top of my list) .


At this point FT8 has become the defacto preferred DXpedition mode for 
many because it usually produces the most QSO's/hour on 160/80 . If I 
were a dxpedition why would I spend hours calling CQ on 160 for an hour 
only to show one or two QSO's for the effort, kinda like a DIY lobotomy 
with an ice pick8^(,  Maybe I should use that time up on 40M 
instead, giving a smaller gun a shot at an ATNO, (argument for a 
different thread...please). For some expeditions #of QSO's is about the 
$$$, more QSO's = more donations. In this day and age the cost of a 
major DXpedition is a mind blowing amount of  (Look at upcoming 
Bouvet, which is in the hole still ..if you haven't donated time to dig 
in your pocket) not knocking anyone just stating a fact of life.


Dave
NR1DX

"before you criticize someone walk a mile in their shoes...that way when 
you do criticize them you will have a mile head start and you will have 
their shoes !"




On 11/5/2022 2:39 PM, k...@kq2m.com wrote:



I am not interested in the digital modes, preferring the traditional 
modes of CW and SSB.  I understand that others feel differently, which 
is fine.  But it bothers me that DXpeditions are now avoiding CW on 
80/160 because they just don't want to bother.


73

Bob, KQ2M



On 2022-11-05 12:45, Tom wrote:

On thursday night conditions here in w1 land were outstanding!   J28MD
(cw) and 5V7RU (ft8) got in the log and I heard HS0ZOY (ft8) at his SR
at -5 for about 5 minutes.  first HS I have ever heard.

hope i get a chance with T88.

On Nov 5, 2022, at 12:00 PM, David Raymond 
 wrote:


Greetings Topbanders. . .

I've spent a considerable amount of time on watch this past week for 
J28MD on Topband (CW).  While they've spent a fair amount of time on 
TB I haven't yet had success yet in spite of my ongoing efforts.   I 
believe it was this past Tuesday night when Joel, W5ZN, said they 
appeared briefly out of the noise (about 10 minutes or so and did 
have success with his BSEF-8 and Hi-Z 8 arrays in diversity)  then 
disappeared the rest of the evening. Wednesday night's opening to NA 
was much longer starting on the East coast and slowly sweeping 
westward with quite a few NA making it in the log (EC + 5's, 8's, & 
9s', VE).  Unfortunately the prop just never quite made it this far 
west.  They barely peaked out of the noise here in Iowa Wednesday 
evening (NA time) just enough to get me excited and dump my call a 
few times hoping for even a marginal QSO. . . but no cigar.  It's a 
little frustrating to see that they always QRT about 30 minutes or 
so prior to their SR but they get credit for being on faithfully on 
CW and FT8 as well.  I know they're getting close to wrapping up but 
hopefully they'll be on (CW) again this evening.


It's been good to have some DX operations QRV and bring some much 
needed life to TB (which sure hasn't had much). . .TY0, 5V, and now 
J28, A3, and T88.  The prop has been very poor. CQing here in the 
evening brings no DX responses and only a handful of EU EBN hits so 
far this season.  Thankfully mornings have activity from our very 
stalwart VK friends (VK3HJ, VK2WF, VK6GX, VK6IR, VK6LW, others) but 
only a handful of JA QSOs so far this season (8 to be exact).  
JA1LZR gets kudos for being QRV almost every morning (NA time),  but 
without much prop, I think only limited success.    I have yet to 
hit the VK4CT RBN CQing here in the mornings.  I don't think this is 
totally attributable to the increased SFI. . . prop from here was 
only marginally better two seasons ago when the SFI was very low.


All that said, I encourage everyone to get on and make some noise.

73. . . Dave, W0FLS (in Iowa)

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


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

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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Working 'long' distances on 160m

[Artek Manuals]

Grant

Having lived in both Spokane and Boston area I can validate you 
observation in a general way and I am now in Florida where the game 
still played differently again than either


I am REALLY INTRIGUED by you comment "Arrival angles for 80 peak at less 
than 10 degrees" . How did you measure that? Actually "measuring"  vs 
hypothesizing has always confounded me when it comes to measuring ACTUAL 
arrival angles


Dave
NR1DX

On 9/25/2022 10:25 AM, Grant Saviers wrote:
My perspective as originally a "1" in Boston and now residing near 
Seattle, is the nickname "suffering sevens" is well applied to my 
friends here in the Pacific Northwest.


Simply, for the PNW, distance isn't that meaningful - it's path that 
matters (and latitude).  What was easy in Boston at 42N is very hard 
in Seattle at 48N re EU on both 80 and 160.  The path is mostly over 
land or ice and usually thru or around the edge of the aurora zone.  
Arrival angles for 80 peak at less than 10*.  OTOH, JA's- yawn.  
Almost exactly the same 4790 miles either way, Seattle to Tokyo or London.


So when you hear a "suffering seven" in EU, reach out.  We also get a 
chuckle when "the band is open" messages get posted from EU and what 
we hear is only noise.


I did get TB DXCC, all from PNW since 2018, so am not complaining. 
Just want some more ;) .


Grant KZ1W

On 9/25/2022 00:12, Steve Ireland wrote:

G’day all

Some food for thought.

Like Roger G3YRO and others who were teenage UK radio amateurs in the 
1960s/1970s I grew up radio-wise on 160m. In those days, the holy 
grail was to work across the Atlantic from UK/Europe.


Nowadays, living in Western Australia, it seems quite funny to think 
that working from Europe to into the east coast of North America is 
something that is still considered as real DX working on topband, as 
the distance is not relatively long and there is no shortage of 
stations (in theory!) at either end.


Back in the late 1960s/early 1970s, UK stations (and others in 
Europe) could only legally use 10W DC input, so working this distance 
was really difficult and thus ‘serious DX’. However, as the 1970s 
progressed, there were TL-922 linear amplifiers in use at various 
G-DXers (but of course, ahem, never on 160m).


Some years after this, 400W output became both legal and commonplace 
below 1832KHz in the UK.


Anyhow, my point is that the distance from Europe/the UK to east 
coast USA is relatively short – from the UK’s Newcastle Upon Tyne 
(where Roger lives) to New York is about 3,330 miles (about 5,360 
km)  as the crow flies.


This is a very similar distance from Perth, Western Australia to 
Auckland, New Zealand – but no serious Southern Hemisphere topband 
DXer would consider a contact between VK6 and ZL1 as a DX contact. 😉


On the other hand, Perth to Newcastle Upon Tyne is 9,056 miles 
(14,574 km) while New York to Perth is 11,613 miles (18,690km). That 
to me is DX. But Australia (Perth in particular) is a long way away 
from anywhere else.


All a question of perspective, history and where you live I guess.  😉

Vy 73

Steve, VK6VZ/G3ZZD/VY2LF

Sent from Mail for Windows 10




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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Beverage upgrade question

[Artek Manuals]

The other thing I have noticed with my BEV's and BOGs is propagation 
mode can cause quite a bit of variability in RDF or F/B. Using other 
than a local station for measurement can give inconsistent and confusing 
results. Often the RDF on some gray line signals will not be as good 
compared to later in the evening. I  attribute (but have no way of 
actually measuring) this to be possibly a a function of the arrival 
angle of the signal . I have seen several references to the possibility 
that gray line propagation is sometimes thought to the result of 
"ducting" and the signals are arriving at higher angles than signals 
arriving at lower angles via more common F-layer propagation ??


 Dave
NR1DX

On 8/24/2022 10:54 AM, David Olean wrote:



On 8/24/2022 9:03 AM, w...@w5zn.org wrote:

Hi Kenny,

Over the past 12 or more years I've conducted numerous comparisons of 
different receive antennas on the low bands. I'm fortunate to have 
enough land to lay all of them out with adequate spacing and perform 
A/B comparisons. I am in a rural area that is relatively quite 
although over those 12 years I have seen the noise floor gradually 
increase up to 5 dB in a couple of directions! A battle I continually 
fight!!


One thing I have emphasized over the years is the realized 
performance of any antenna will be different depending on the 
geographical location. Another point is most times radio amateurs 
have unrealistic expectations of what the performance of a specific 
antenna will be.


With that said, I have compared the antenna you are considering at 
your QTH here at W5ZN with a single Beverage that you currently use. 
I could not document any noticeable improvement between the two. 
That's not to say there wasn't any improvement, it just was not 
noticeable.


I begin to notice a difference when the RDF is increased by more than 
1.5dB. I realize this is splitting hairs when we're claiming only a 
few tenths of a dB difference but that is based on my real world 
documented comparison.


The most significant improvement I have documented is moving from a 
Beverage to a phased vertical array. The Hi-Z and BSEF 8 vertical 
arrays are the top, with the HiZ outperforming the BSEF by just a tad 
due to the HiZ-8's improved F/B and F/S performance. The YCCC-9 is 
also an excellent performer. My measurements have also confirmed the 
modeling data for all of the arrays. I presented this data at Contest 
University - Dayton this year.


So my recommendation is to erect the new Beverage and give it a try. 
You may very well notice a improvement. If constructed correctly, it 
should be an improvement even if only a few tenths of a dB RDF and it 
won't be a loss !


73 Joel W5ZN





On 2022-08-23 14:07, Kenny Silverman wrote:

In a rural area with no significant man made noise, if you redesign a
beverage for better RDF when do you start to notice a difference?

I’m considering upgrading my single EU beverage at 625’ (190m) to a
pair in echelon where will each be 550’ (168m) with 20’ (6m) spacing
. The increase in RDF is 0.8 dB - will it be noticeable?

I realize if there’s noise in a direction where you reduce the energy
you will better hear the difference , but my EU beverage is quiet.
Though the F/B change will help with thunder storms off the back.

Overall I tend to receive better than I transmit to EU.

73 , Kenny K2KW
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector

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

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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: PLease!

[Artek Manuals]

I am with Pete on you "no quoted context" guys . I have given up and 
simply delete those messages without reading as well ( your loss not mine)


Ahhh and then are the "well meaning thread hijackers" . In my vision of 
the "next life"  both groups will be doomed to trying to work Bouvet and 
P5 on 160M with  1W QRP on an indoor loop


Dave

NR1DX

On 2/1/2022 4:52 PM, William Cromwell wrote:



On 2/1/22 3:10 PM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
Amen, Mel.  My favorites (ha) are the people who don't include *any* 
context in their replies.


73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network
web server at.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

On 2/1/2022 2:05 PM, Mike Waters wrote:

Thank you, Mel. This needed to be said. :-)

On Tue, Feb 1, 2022, 1:00 PM MEL CRICHTON wrote:


Folks... when you reply to a post PLEASE do not include the entire
digest in your reply just the message, or even better just the 
line
or paragraph, that you are responding to. I could not find the new 
stuff

inside all the old attachments in the last digest.

Sorry to be a griper Not my usual cheery self today

Mel KJ9C


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


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

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

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

--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: K9AY RX antenna

[Artek Manuals]

Pete.

The recent modeling I did in evaluating the effects of soil type for the 
Folded Counter Poise as a ground plane was a real eye opener as to how 
much soil conductivity affects the performance of any given antenna.


QUESTIONS:

1) What Kind of soil are you working with (conductivity, dielectric 
constant )


2) Tell us more about the radials that you have laid down? for both the 
K9AY and your Inverted L


3) What is the proximity to other antennas? in particular the 160 M Inv-L

Dave

NR1DX



On 1/31/2022 9:10 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
My K9AY loop (the commercial version from Array Solutions) seems to be 
kind of an indifferent performer.  I believe it is set up properly. 
and I've laid down a radial under each side of the loops, but while it 
shows some directivity on high-end broadcast stations, 160M 
directivity is limited to nil, signal strengths are rarely better than 
my inverted-L, and the adjusting the termination seems to make very 
little difference.  Any hints?



--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: test: please ignore

[Artek Manuals]

Test

NR1DX

--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Radials on ground

[Artek Manuals]

Pete

I  was just  having this very discussion with some one else this week. 
We modeled a 100 ' tall T on 160 M with sixty-four 100' long radials 
using NEC-4. with that many radials there was essentially no discernible 
difference between #22 wire radials and #14 radials on average earth 
ground. If you want I'll run the analysis using NEC4 again against your 
smaller radial field later today. Give me the size of the vertical 
radiator(L, T or straight Vertical)


Dave

NR1DX

On 1/7/2022 9:14 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
For the moment at least, I'm using on-the-ground radials for my 160M 
inverted L. Discussion on the reflector triggered a thought - is the 
size of wire used for on-the-ground radials - or elevated radials for 
that matter - significant?  I ask this because I have a huge spool of 
military-surplus, silver-plated (!) 18-gauge insulated copper wire.  
Currently using 16, +/- 1/8 wave on-the-ground radials made with the 
stuff.   Feedpoint resistance seems to be by the book, at least as 
compared to feeding the antenna against a single ground rod.



--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: K9AY Loop Questions

[Artek Manuals]

Comments below

On 1/7/2022 6:23 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:



But I picked up on people saying that EZNEC doesn't model these antennas
near the ground very well.


This is very true of EZENEC based on NEC -2EZENEC PRO 4 based on 
NEC-4 depending on attention to detail and uniformity of soil conditions 
can produce results for models near ground that represent reality.  
NEC-5 was intended to address  the lack of uniformity in the ground 
medium ( i.e having half your ground plane consumed by 3 story apartment 
building as an example) but the modeling could becomes quite an 
exercise. Unfortunately the father of NEC-5 passed away unexpectedly and 
left its development in limbo  and a fair share of questions and 
possible bugs. When last I talked to LLNL they were still searching for 
a replacement for Jerry





I think part of the reason is that DX Propagation on 160 is usually much
higher angle than on 80m . . . but I also think that there is more low angle
radiation from my Dipole than EZNEC would suggest !


This is very true especially near gray line. I have noticed on numerous 
occasions the the F/B on my Beverage and BOGS becomes very poor at 
gray-line only to return to expected performance later in the evening. 
Popular wisdom suggests that most 160 DX occurs at 15-25 degree arrival 
angle . I suspect that gray line propagation arrives due to "ducting" at 
even higher angles. I am toying with the idea of building a loop on a 
gimble that would allow  rotation not only for azimuth but for elevation 
as well. I suspect however that I will find that the arrival angle can 
change quite rapidly making it hard to track and is one of the reasons 
for deep QSB


Dave

NR1DX

--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: LOOP on ground test 160m

[Artek Manuals]

Andy

I did a lot of experiments about two years ago with LOGs and BOGs.  
Generally I found the BOG to be better and a smaller investment in 
"wire". I did a lot of experiments with feeding the LOGs in different 
locations (sides, corners, etc) and the results we never very 
outstanding. Now I was not as religious about having the LOG actual 
laying on bare earth everywhere ( see next paragraph) since I was not 
aware at the time that actual laying on top of the ground might be 
better for this family of antennas.


My other observation is that for best F/B and RDF is that unlike it s 
big brother the BEVERAGE that shorter is better for the BOG. In my case 
I have very poor soil (.001/5) . 6" down it pure white sand it ever 
stops raining here in Florida for a year it will become a large sand 
dune. In my case extensive modeling with AutoEZ and EZENEC PRO4/Ver6. 
suggest that optimum F/B @20 degrees arrival is obtained at at about 225 
feet (68 meters) and optimum RDF is obtained at ~275ft ( 84M) . I then 
ran the same analysis with better soil conductivity and optimum BOG 
lengths were even shorter!  This is likely the reason that some folks 
report that the BOG is a reasonably good performer and for others find 
it is useless.


Now as a matter of full disclosure, all my BOGS are bi-directional with 
reflection transformers at the ends and  made from RG6, so the actual 
antenna (not just the feedline) is a bigger conductor than a "wire" I 
also noted in both theory and in practice that elevation above actual 
earth of even a few inches destroyed the F/B. I have since gone to great 
pains to get my BOGS "touching" the bare sandy earth . Those of you with 
real dirt and or grass may have a different experience !!


Dave

NR1DX

On 1/7/2022 3:06 AM, Andree DL8LAS via Topband wrote:


  Hey gentlemen,another test with a new RX antenna here at my QTH.Weather was 
fine yesterday, so I built a LOG.Size 30m x 30 x 30 x 30,
direction 315/125.First test this morning was not bad , compared to my 180m 
long beverage to USA.The LOG is a little bit more noisy, but for a simple wire 
absolutely ok.If you are interested, here is a video from the QSO N1PGA 
whileswitching the RX antennas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA2IZeG0LpU
73 , Andy DL8LAS



  
www.dl8las.com

www.swing-company-bigband.de/
www.uni-big-band-kiel.de/
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Wednesday CW DX Activity Night

[Artek Manuals]

Roger

I am not exactly sure which BETA RBN sight you are referring to. Could 
you post a link?


Generally speaking here in the deep south of NA I can clearly see the 
affects of the up swing in the sunspot cycle. The prior two years on 
most evenings I could copy some EU at my sunset. The sunset openings to 
EU this season have been VERY rare in Florida. Sunrise openings on the 
Europe end of the path are far more numerous and reliable in occurrence. 
For many years I worked the EU/NA path with ease when I lived "up north 
( in NH) . That all changed when I retired to the south and it is quite 
noticeable.


Dave

NR1DX

On 1/4/2022 1:25 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:

Just another reminder . . .

Hope to see lots of stations on 160m tomorrow night.

(conditions were really good last night, with mine and other EU stations'
RBN reports from NA peaking over 40dB S/N ! But very little activity)

Oh and the new Beta RBN site is really good - previously I had RBN set to
show all English stations' signals in the US . . . but now it can display
ALL EU signals from any NA site.

73 Roger G3YRO



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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Need antenna help

[Artek Manuals]

The first question to ask is what is the operating goal for 160.

1) Local net or rag chew with his buddies.? In that case use the 
existing vertical assuming the AATU can match it is enough . Might have 
to a add lump loading coil at base  to get it the point AATU can deal 
with it . Generally this is a low impedance solution and likely a good 
open frame style relay with 10-20 amp contacts area will be fine


2) Casual worked all states and occasional EU DX especially from NE USA 
. I worked a fair amount of DX years ago using only a 33ft Butternut 
vertical and a KW which for all practical purposes is a simple base 
loaded vertical


3) Is high power involved or is this a  barefoot operation?

4) If he really wants to be heard ( and be able to switch the neighbors 
touch lamps on and off at 25 wpm ..chuckle) then switched in top loading 
wires and 1500W amp is the reality. OR move to the county and put up 
some real antennas.


Dave

NR1DX

On 12/7/2021 10:29 AM, FRED BELGHAUS wrote:

Gentlemen:

I am trying to assist a friend from my local radio club in his efforts to
get his station on 160. He has a 43 foot vertical with 60 ground mounted
radials, and an AATU at the base. He sends DC on the coax to operate the
AATU.

I would think that it might be possible to add a horizontal wire at the
top, and switch in the
additional length to convert the vertical into an inverted L for 160, but
the specifics of how best to do this are not clear to me. I imagine a
vacuum relay would be the best method, but where should it be located, and
so on.

Rather than trying a number of possible things that might work (but not
very well), I am asking the experts on this list to provide the best
method, with specific instructions as to how to accomplish this, or 
provide

a reasonable alternative method that would produce successful results on
160.

I can furnish my friend's email for direct contact with him.

Many thanks in advance for your assistance.

73,

Fred W2AAB
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Comscope 3227

[Artek Manuals]

Is that "SOLID" copper center conductor or the Copper plated aluminum as 
is the case with LMR400 these days...8^(


Dave
NR1DX

On 4/8/2021 5:43 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 4/8/2021 2:18 PM, Jim Garland wrote:
On a related topic, I’ve stopped using LMR400 and LMR400UF coax 
completely for HF work, using instead trusty, old-time RG-213, with 
its untinned copper braid.


I've used a LOT of Commscope 3227 and their PTFE plenum equivalent. 
It's loss specs are the same as LMR400, solid #10 copper center, 
pretty dense tinned copper braid over Al foil. Both solder quite well. 
The PTFE plenum coax is smaller diameter, so I build it up with heat 
shrink before mounting the 83-1SP connectors.


73, Jim K9YC
___
Amps mailing list
a...@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: PL259 type connectors for RG11

[Artek Manuals]

My go to guy for Silver-Teflon PL-259 and� Amphenol. Good selection of 
Solder and Crimp ON ...Also sells those hard to find heavy duty crimp tools


https://www.ebay.com/str/n5iawrfcommunications


Cant recommend him enough

Dave
NR1DX

On 4/8/2021 3:22 PM, Raymond Benny wrote:
I'm in the process of building a vertical phased antenna system for 
80m and

160m. I am looking to purchase some crimp type connectors to build the
phasing lines but have not found any. RF Parts does not have them.

Somewhere online, it was suggested I use the typical RG8 /213 crimp-on
connector instead and wonder if this is OK? I do know that the center
conductor is smaller in diameter than common RG8/213 cable. Would this 
make

a difference? It seems to me that in the past I did use the standard PL259
and soldered the center conductor and braid, but I'd rather use crimp-on
type connectors instead.

Any thoughts or other sources for RG11 type PL259 connectors? I did try
google and eBay, but they all ended up showing either RG6 or 'N' type
connectors.

Ray,
N6VR/W7YA
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Elementary Inverted L questions

[Artek Manuals]

Technically the insulation should electrically lengthen the antenna 
about 1.5-2 % (lower the frequency)


As Wes said the dimensions would be helpful. is the flat op horizontal 
or does it slope down if it slopes how low is the far end?


I dont think 17 turns of RG400 is doing much for you on 160M but with a 
ground mounted radials (IMO) not likely needed...what is the "R" at X=0.


�Are you measuring R+jX at the antenna or at the shack end of the coax? 
How long is the coax


Dave
NR1DX



On 3/25/2021 11:54 AM, Wes wrote:
How long is the vertical section?� The insulation should have minimal 
effect.


Wes� N7WS


On 3/25/2021 8:07 AM, N4ZR wrote:
I have been trying to replace my inverted L, which broke a few weeks 
ago, and am having all sorts of puzzlements. Please be kind - I was a 
history major.


1.� The inverted L broke at the turn, so I went looking for sturdier 
wire.� I wound up with some #14 insulated recommended by our local RF 
maven, and put up 140 feet initially, figuring I would prune it *up* 
into the CW part of the band.� Imagine my surprise when it showed up 
resonating at 1977 KHz (on an AA-55 Zoom).� Does insulation have such 
a profound effect on velocity factor?


2.� My feedpoint arrangement has 17 turns of RG-400 as a common mode 
choke, with the radial field connected to the RG-400 shield at the 
antenna end.� Initially I tried measuring the resonance without the 
radial connection.� No resonance and infinite SWR. I connected the 
radial field (8 X 70-foot radials on the ground) and that's when I 
saw the 1977 KHz resonance (X crossing zero). SWR at minimum was 
above 2:1.� Does this make sense?� I know the radial field is 
inadequate for good performance, but...




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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Looking for hi-Z antenna

[Artek Manuals]

Rich
Roughly how big is your back yard? Any trees over 30' high?

( I did work Antarctica from Texas once with a Bnut HF-9V and about 8 
radials, so even a blind pig finds a truffle now and then ...but your 
instincts are correct about there being better alternatives ...8^)


Dave
NR1DX

On 3/10/2021 8:07 AM, Richard Quick wrote:

I have as much of a compromised antenna for 160 as you can get.
A Butternut HF2V with a 160 coil, mounted on a chain link fence.
I have a small lot with overhead power lines across the back of the property, 
and Am looking for a better idea.
I’m thinking a hi impedance feed point antenna ie:450 ohms would require a much 
less extensive ground radial system than say, an inverted L with low impedance. 
Easier to match a 450 Ground than 37 ohms.
Am I nuts?  Anyone with ideas along this line of thinking?



Rich - W4RQ Amateur Radio: The Original Social Media
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: Broad band antenna approach for 160 Contesting

[Artek Manuals]

Rick et all

I have changed the Subject line rather than further hijack Tree's 
original thread


I have a "T" Radiator 60' high  with flat top of the T, 80' long. Next 4 
elevated non resonant  90' radials at 6ft.This gets me to ~22.5 ohms, 
2.25:1 matching  transformer out of Sevick to go to 50ohms . I then tune 
the system to resonance with a tapped inductor in series with the radial 
side of the feed, The taps are relay selected .  Taps selected for a dip 
at 1816, 1840 , 1860, 1880, 1900 and 1920. SWR 1.3:1 from 1.8 to 19.5 
which the my KPA1500 and Alpha 9500 both love.


Dave
NR1DX
manu...@artekmanuals.com

On 2/27/2021 3:23 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:

On 2/27/2021 11:01 AM, Tree wrote:

My general comments about the contest.

Back about 15 years ago - it seemed like there was plenty of activity 
above
1900.  AA1K spent most of the contest in 1999 kHz.  Maybe it was 
conditions
- but it seemed to be a lot less going on this year above 1.9 MHz.  I 
had


I thought about retuning my TX vertical somewhat higher temporarily
just for this contest, but I was thinking that many stations would not
have the capability to go above 1.9 MHz, so CQ'ing up there would have
limited success.  Without changing from my "normal" CW setting, I can
get away with going up to almost 1.9 MHz before the Alpha 9500 complains
too much.

What is really needed is a remote switched tuning network that would
divide the band into eight 25 kHz segments.  Then I could S&P the high
frequency stations on a demand basis.  It is on my "someday" list of
things to build.  I already have built one for 80/75 meters with 8
segments, so the design is in my head.


Rick N6RK
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector 

--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: ARRL CW Contest

[Artek Manuals]

in all I spent about 5 hours mostly from 04:30Z to 07:00Z both nights

Signals were generally good . Unusual "spotlight" propagation Friday 
Night/Saturday morn. Worked a half dozen S5xxx stations ALL with 
unusually loud signals. More than one over S-9 on the BOG. While ALL 
other EU's were down as is typical just above my noise floor. One S5 
commented that I too was very loud.


In general things were better on a broader scale the 2nd night here in 
the tropics


Did not seem to be the same level of participation as prior year. only 
68 Q's in 27 countries this year  vs 98 Q's in 51 countries in 2020.  
This might reflect the impact of fewer multi ops and dxpeditions this 
year due to CV-19 ???



Dave
NR1DX


On 2/22/2021 6:49 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:

Well conditions to NA from EU were pretty good over the weekend.

I came on 160m for a couple of hours on Friday Night, and again on Saturday
night . . .

Managed to work a total of 132 NA stations, which I was really pleased with.

That included lots of people that I had never worked before . . . but what
saddens me, is why these people don't come on Top Band when there ISN'T a
Contest !

Roger G3YRO


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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: CQ 160

[Artek Manuals]

Here in the south ( Florida) much the same propagation.. A few really 
strong stations from EU ( one UA2F that was so strong as to be 
suspicious) . The best EU signals were nearer their sunrise. Earlier in 
the evening not so much, a handful of week  EU stations with deep QSB 
were the norm earlier in both evenings. Like you NO Asia, SA or VK/ZJ.


Worked 46 states missed KL7, KH6, SD and ND ...no VE5 up in Canada...Odd 
hole in the N. America prop� no ND, SD or VE5 all right together 
geographically...h???


Dave
NR1DX
manu...@artekmanuals.com

On 1/31/2021 10:17 PM, Gary Smith wrote:

I haven't been on much at all for the last
6 months or so. Had a lot of physical
issues, difficult getting around and
antenna problems & nobody to help fix
them. Better now, most of the antenna
issues are fixed (have to wait till spring
to fix the rest) and it was good to be on
160 again.

EU wasn't so strong with the exception of
2-3 stations that were the loudest on the
bands. No SA, Pacific or Asia this time.
Sometimes the propagation Gods work &
sometimes they don't.

Always a good time.

73,

Gary
KA1J
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: s meter

[Artek Manuals]

Ron et all

Ditto
Dave
NR1DX

On 1/18/2021 7:29 AM, Ron Spencer via Topband wrote:

For the low bands, I typically listen on my receive antennas. S meter readings 
on them are proportional to the signal strength but not an accurate account. 
I'd estimate it might be 4 or 5 S units down from the true signal strength. I 
never use the S meter reading when giving reports. If I did most would be 
between S0 and S3. Instead I judge based on what I hear and how well I hear it. 
Not meant to be a judgement on how others use the S meter. Just how I use it 
here.



73

Ron

N4XD

Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: One Way Propagation.

[Artek Manuals]

Comment below


On 1/17/2021 11:09 AM, Wes wrote:
I'm not going to smack this tar baby, other than to note that Elecraft 
is a special case with respect to S-meters.  K3(S) have an "Absolute" 
mode that compensates for preamp gain or input attenuation. So the 
S-meter becomes a decent power meter.


I think it's unconscionable that other manufactures, with 
microprocessor controlled radios, haven't incorporated this. 


The fact that certain features appear in certain radios and not in 
others may lie in the "intellectual property" . Mfg A is unwilling to 
sell the rights to a particular feature to competitor Mfg B or at least 
is unwilling to sell below a price that will compensate A for the loss 
in sales gained by B because they now have this feature too. Or B cant 
afford to recover the higher "cost" in enough added sales.?


There are at least two sides to every story, often more, ...The truth 
lies somewhere in between.


Dave
NR1DX



--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: One Way Propagation.

[Artek Manuals]

Roger
Lucky you!

 My S meter rarely goes below S4( on the BOG) and S8 on the transmit 
antenna  ..


In the context of measuring one way propagation there  is the purist's 
dilemma of receiving antenna signal level vs transmit antenna signal level ?


Dave
NR1DX

On 1/17/2021 8:04 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:

Well personally I always give Signal Strength reports from my S Meter . . .

So it doesn't matter whether my Noise Level is S2 or S6 . . . I'm telling
you how strong your signal is at my QTH.

Roger G3YRO


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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Band Conditions

[Artek Manuals]

Compared to last year...they are
Dave
NR1DX

On 1/5/2021 5:25 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
With all the posts here in the last few days one might draw the 
conclusion that band conditions are really terrible!


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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Elevated radial number vs efficiency

[Artek Manuals]

I have taken the liberty to move Jim's most recent reply on the Common 
mode thread over here where it is more on topic


Jim:
True enough

There is a work around however

Dick Weber k5UI ( SK ..I think) published an article in Communications 
Quarterly in 1999 on an approach using non resonant ( i.e not .25 
wavelength ) radials which significantly reduces the impact of 
unbalanced radial currents. I cant find a link to a copy on the WEB, I 
have a copy of the article (contact me off list) if you cant find one . 
Running four 100 foot radials ( ~.2 wavelengths) I am able to have 
(measured)� radial currents that vary less than 2% over all four radials 
installed in a heavily wooded environment where some attempt was made to 
try and keep all of them "around " 7' above ground


At .2 wavelengths N6LF's work suggests that I am giving up around .2db 
...which suggests I might want to look at going from 100' radials to 150 
/160' ? Will have to look at that, it would require I redo all my 
matching networks not sure I want to go through that for .3db ...8^(


NR1DX
manu...@artekmanuals.com

On 1/1/2021 4:28 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 1/1/2021 12:09 PM, Mike Waters wrote:

I am ONE of the people who claim that four elevated radials can have
approximately the same efficiency as 120 buried quarter wavelength 
radials.


N6LF's work on this showed that imbalance of the current in elevated 
radials can significantly reduce field strength. Imbalance can be 
caused by differences in heights, lengths, and soil underneath them. 
Depending on our real estate, hams may find it difficult or 
impractical to install elevated radials having the symmetry of a 
broadcast station. Rudy has published work showing that 8 elevated 
radials are better than 4 for this reason.


73, Jim K9YC



On 1/1/2021 4:55 PM, Mike Waters wrote:

Thanks for catching that, Dave!

I certanly can't argue with Rudy N6LF, but those two λ/4 10' high elevated
radials in my old 160m page made that inverted-L a "killer"* in an ARRL 160
contest about 10 years ago. That was using only 100 watts. Broke a number
of DX pileups, to my utter amazement.

*Having said that, I had nothing else to compare it to in an A/B test!

73, Mike
W0BTU

On Fri, Jan 1, 2021, 3:37 PM Artek Manuals  wrote:


Correction that should be N6LF (not N6FL)

NR1DX

On 1/1/2021 4:26 PM, Artek Manuals wrote:

N6FL was quoted earlier ...
https://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/design_of_radial_ground_systems/

However N6FL states "The article is primarily intended to show why I
(he, N6FL)

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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Elevated radial number vs efficiency

[Artek Manuals]

Correction that should be N6LF (not N6FL)

NR1DX

On 1/1/2021 4:26 PM, Artek Manuals wrote:

Mike & Bill

Thank you!!! I sometimes think there is too much emphasis on NEC 
modelling and never enough real world verification with actual field 
measurements


{I have hijacked the original thread and changed the subject. to be 
more on point }


N6FL� was quoted earlier in the previous thread, for his work on 
studying the effects of elevated radials and he in fact states on his 
web page which IS by all means� worthy of reading and close study.� I 
am reposting the link here 
https://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/design_of_radial_ground_systems/


However N6FL� states "The article is primarily intended to show why I 
(he, N6FL)� suggest that 10-12 elevated radials should be used if 
possible. " . His own data however is a bit contradictory and his 
comment lacks� the context of radial length. Radials of .25 
wavelengths (Page 37 figure 12, QEX, March 2012) produces a gain 
identical to 16 radials of the same length. His data suggests that if 
you lengthen the elevated radials to .6 wavelengths then 16 elevated 
radials do indeed produce ~.6db improvement over four radials of that� 
same length. Most of us are unlikely to want to invest in the almost a 
mile of additional wire on 160M to get that .6db improvement, let 
alone the labor involved in stringing it up and keeping it up.


What I also stumbled on in reading that same article is that only two 
elevated radials is only down by .4db compared to four radials, which 
would suggest that even only two (elevated) radials would perform as 
good or better than ground mounted radial fields of a couple of dozen 
radial range. A quick google search did not produce a similar study to 
N6LF's work for ground mounted radials though I am sure it is out 
there and the readers of this thread will find it for everyone's 
reading enjoyment !


Cheers and HNY
Dave
NR1DX


On 1/1/2021 3:09 PM, Mike Waters wrote:

This link at to top of that page is a must-read, too.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180923221943/http://lists.contesting.com/_topband/2007-11/msg00248.html. 


Guess I might as well include the text...

I am ONE of the people who claim that four elevated radials can have
approximately the same efficiency as 120 buried quarter wavelength 
radials.
I have installed such systems at three Standard Broadcast stations in 
the
United States, and made field strength measurements that, when 
analyzed in
accordance with FCC procedure, showed that the unattenuated field 
strength
at one kilometer was essentially the same as the FCC criteria for 
broadcast
antennas with 120 buried  90 degree radials (Figure 8 of Part 73 of 
the FCC

Rules).

The first station was in 1990 and it was WPCI, 1490 kilohertz, 
Greenville,

SC where the height of the tower steel was 93 degrees above the base
insulator and 87.2 degrees above the point of attachment of the four
elevated radials.  The radials were horizontal all the way to the tower
where they were attached with an insulator and connected to the outer
conductor of a coax cable.  The coax center conductor was connected 
to the
tower at that point.  The license application containing the field 
strength
measurements, measurement analysis and explanations can be found in 
the FCC

Public Reference Room under file number 900615AE.

Measurements were made on eight equally spaced azimuths out to three
kilometers using a Nems Clark model 120E field strength meter. 146
measurements were made for an average of over 18 per azimuth. Power 
was set
at one kilowatt using a General Radio model 916A RF impedance bridge 
for the
radiation resistance and a Delta Electronics precision RF ammeter for 
the

antenna current.  The measurement data was analyzed with EDX Engineering
program AMDAT which is described in IEEE Transactions on 
Broadcasting, Vol.

BC-32, No. 2, June 1986.

The result was an RMS value of the eight radials of 302.7 mV/m/kW at one
kilometer.  This compares with the FCC Figure 8 value of 307.8 
mV/m/kW for a
93 degree tower with 120 ninety degree buried radials, however, a 
tower 87.2
degrees (the height of the WPCI tower above the four horizontal 
radials) has
an FCC rated efficiency of 303.7 mV/m/kW, one mV/m more than our 
measured

value.

The WPCI radials were number 10 copper wire 90 degrees long and 8.7 
degrees

(16 feet) above ground.  A coax cable was fed through the inside of the
tower from the T network at the tower base to the point of radial
attachment.  The top of the base insulator was approximately five 
feet above
ground.  The impedance was measured at the input to the coax which 
was the

point of current measurement for determination of power.  The bridge
measurement was R 78 +j56.4.

The FCC personnel in the Broadcast Bureau were initially reluctant to
entertain the notion of an AM broadcast ground system which was so 
radically
different from what had been used from the beginning of vertical 
b

Topband: Elevated radial number vs efficiency

[Artek Manuals]

Mike & Bill

Thank you!!! I sometimes think there is too much emphasis on NEC 
modelling and never enough real world verification with actual field 
measurements


{I have hijacked the original thread and changed the subject. to be more 
on point }


N6FL  was quoted earlier in the previous thread, for his work on 
studying the effects of elevated radials and he in fact states on his 
web page which IS by all means  worthy of reading and close study.  I am 
reposting the link here 
https://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/design_of_radial_ground_systems/


However N6FL  states "The article is primarily intended to show why I 
(he, N6FL)  suggest that 10-12 elevated radials should be used if 
possible. " . His own data however is a bit contradictory and his 
comment lacks  the context of radial length. Radials of .25 wavelengths 
(Page 37 figure 12, QEX, March 2012) produces a gain identical to 16 
radials of the same length. His data suggests that if you lengthen the 
elevated radials to .6 wavelengths then 16 elevated radials do indeed 
produce ~.6db improvement over four radials of that  same length. Most 
of us are unlikely to want to invest in the almost a mile of additional 
wire on 160M to get that .6db improvement, let alone the labor involved 
in stringing it up and keeping it up.


What I also stumbled on in reading that same article is that only two 
elevated radials is only down by .4db compared to four radials, which 
would suggest that even only two (elevated) radials would perform as 
good or better than ground mounted radial fields of a couple of dozen 
radial range. A quick google search did not produce a similar study to 
N6LF's work for ground mounted radials though I am sure it is out there 
and the readers of this thread will find it for everyone's reading 
enjoyment !


Cheers and HNY
Dave
NR1DX


On 1/1/2021 3:09 PM, Mike Waters wrote:

This link at to top of that page is a must-read, too.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180923221943/http://lists.contesting.com/_topband/2007-11/msg00248.html.
Guess I might as well include the text...

I am ONE of the people who claim that four elevated radials can have
approximately the same efficiency as 120 buried quarter wavelength radials.
I have installed such systems at three Standard Broadcast stations in the
United States, and made field strength measurements that, when analyzed in
accordance with FCC procedure, showed that the unattenuated field strength
at one kilometer was essentially the same as the FCC criteria for broadcast
antennas with 120 buried  90 degree radials (Figure 8 of Part 73 of the FCC
Rules).

The first station was in 1990 and it was WPCI, 1490 kilohertz, Greenville,
SC where the height of the tower steel was 93 degrees above the base
insulator and 87.2 degrees above the point of attachment of the four
elevated radials.  The radials were horizontal all the way to the tower
where they were attached with an insulator and connected to the outer
conductor of a coax cable.  The coax center conductor was connected to the
tower at that point.  The license application containing the field strength
measurements, measurement analysis and explanations can be found in the FCC
Public Reference Room under file number 900615AE.

Measurements were made on eight equally spaced azimuths out to three
kilometers using a Nems Clark model 120E field strength meter.  146
measurements were made for an average of over 18 per azimuth.  Power was set
at one kilowatt using a General Radio model 916A RF impedance bridge for the
radiation resistance and a Delta Electronics precision RF ammeter for the
antenna current.  The measurement data was analyzed with EDX Engineering
program AMDAT which is described in IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, Vol.
BC-32, No. 2, June 1986.

The result was an RMS value of the eight radials of 302.7 mV/m/kW at one
kilometer.  This compares with the FCC Figure 8 value of 307.8 mV/m/kW for a
93 degree tower with 120 ninety degree buried radials, however, a tower 87.2
degrees (the height of the WPCI tower above the four horizontal radials) has
an FCC rated efficiency of 303.7 mV/m/kW, one mV/m more than our measured
value.

The WPCI radials were number 10 copper wire 90 degrees long and 8.7 degrees
(16 feet) above ground.  A coax cable was fed through the inside of the
tower from the T network at the tower base to the point of radial
attachment.  The top of the base insulator was approximately five feet above
ground.  The impedance was measured at the input to the coax which was the
point of current measurement for determination of power.  The bridge
measurement was R 78 +j56.4.

The FCC personnel in the Broadcast Bureau were initially reluctant to
entertain the notion of an AM broadcast ground system which was so radically
different from what had been used from the beginning of vertical broadcast
antennas in the 1920s, and as refined by the classic article on broadcast
ground systems in the thirties (Ground Systems as a Factor in Anten

Re: Topband: Vertical choke needed?

[Artek Manuals]

True indeed Charlie

It was such an observation by accident that clued me into the fact that 
I needed a choke on a system with elevated radials the first time :)


Dave
NR1DX

On 1/1/2021 2:10 PM, n0...@juno.com wrote:

To offer another view.IMHO
Measure the impedance at the base of the antenna without the feedline
attached in any way. While watching your instrument (259B, VNA, etc),
touch the feedline *shield* to the radials at the base of the antenna.
If your instrument shows
no change in the impedance, the feedline shield isn't carrying "any"
current
and therefore doesn't need to be choked.

73,
Charlie, N0TT

On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 19:49:43 -0700 Wes  writes:

I have the same situation and no choke. IMHO the transmission line
is just
another random length radial. I don't have chokes on any of the
others either.

Wes N7WS


On 12/31/2020 5:15 PM, Kenneth Silverman wrote:

Hello, I have an inverted-L and the radials are laying on the

ground AND

the coax is on the ground too with radials right near the coax

run. Do I

need a choke to stop any feedline coupling/radiation, and if so,

where in

the feedline?

The antenna is in the woods so burying either the radials or coax

won't be

easy.

Many thanks, Kenny K2KW
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband

Reflector


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


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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Vertical choke needed?

[Artek Manuals]

Jim/ K9YC

I am with you 100% on your comments below

my 80/ 160 verticals all run "10 lbs of ferrite" at the feed points but 
that is because I run elevated non resonant radials these days. 5lbs of 
ferrites just got to warm to touch, but that is fodder for a whole 
different thread.� My "jungle" makes running ground mounted radial 
systems unpractical.


Among other things� with my wire T's and L's I also avoid coax runs that 
are multiples of odd 1/4 waves at the frequency of interest which helps 
( how much ?)� didn't measure it a the time, but the Winkeyer stopped 
locking up ..:)


Dave
NR1DX

On 1/1/2021 4:19 AM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 12/31/2020 5:01 PM, Michael Walker wrote:

Hi Ken

Chokes at both ends of the feed line are always a good idea.


At the base of the antenna, yes, so that the feedline doesn't become a 
radial. More are probably wasted money. See my latest Cookbook at 
k9yc.com/publish.htm


I have a similar setup to you but with elevated radials and I have 
Mix 31 chokes right at the base of the antenna with an UNUN since I 
am using 75 ohm coax and then more chokes at the antenna switch.


You can�t use enough chokes.


The only good reasons I've discovered for using chokes on feedlines 
anywhere but at the feedpoint are 1) to break up the feedline into 
lengths that won't be parasitic becoming parasitic elements to other 
verticals; and 2) to prevent noise pickup by a mechanism quantified as 
the Transfer Impedance of the cable, whereby shield current is 
converted to a differential voltage inside the cable.


W3LPL has observed that #2 should not be an issue with coax laying on 
the ground. I am not so optimistic with the CATV RG6 we often use for 
RX antennas, whose shields are VERY flimsy at MF, but I always value 
Frank's observations.


As to chokes at the station -- if they solve problems, they're putting 
a band-aid on badly done (or missing) grounding and bonding. See 
N0AX's ARRL book on the topic, and/or the slide deck for my talks 
about it.


http://k9yc.com/GroundingAndAudio.pdf

73, Jim K9YC



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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Vertical choke needed?

[Artek Manuals]

Kenny

My personal experience with radials on the ground is that with a fair 
number (16 or more) that I end up with little if any common mode 
currents on the coax . Smaller (numbers of)� ground mounted radial 
counts could benefit somewhat from a choke, depends on other factors� 
besides the number of radials like relative ground conductivity.


Not hard to measure see 
https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/measuring-common-mode-current.623054/page-2. 
you can make a simple common mode choke and do a before and after to see 
the relative change..if any


Elevated radial systems NEED a choke ..PERIOD. Been there , done that, 
got the RF burns to prove it...8^(


Dave
NR1DX



On 12/31/2020 7:15 PM, Kenneth Silverman wrote:

Hello, I have an inverted-L and the radials are laying on the ground AND
the coax is on the ground too with radials right near the coax run. Do I
need a choke to stop any feedline coupling/radiation, and if so, where in
the feedline?

The antenna is in the woods so burying either the radials or coax won't be
easy.

Many thanks, Kenny K2KW
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Question about on ground radials field.

[Artek Manuals]

Not a simple , on size fits all answer

What happens depends on the frequency  you are talking about     ( I 
assume 1.825 but if it is a multi band vertical ..then???) and how much 
above the ground plane you are talking about


And the approximate foot print of your radial systems ( square lot 
filled in with radials ?)


on 160M the raising of a few feet will likely have little affect if any 
on the overall efficiency of the antenna if that was what you were hoping?


Dave
NR1DX


On 12/31/2020 2:47 PM, Jim Clymer wrote:

Hello Gang,
This is somewhat related to the "Will radials on ground help?" thread. I
have poked around in various discussion groups but haven't found a specific
answer.
Assuming I have a fairly decent radial system on the ground (60 radials of
various lengths, some longer than 1/4 wave, many shorter), what happens if
I elevate the feedpoint of a quarter-wave, base-fed vertical? Let's say I
have an aluminum mounting post properly bonded to the radial plate, the top
of which will serve as the "radial system" connection for the vertical. Is
there some fractional part of a wavelength that the feedpoint could be
raised and not lose the effectiveness of the on ground radial system?
Thanks, and HNY to all!
Jim - WS6X


Today's Topics:
1. Re: Elevated Radials - will radials on ground help?
--
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 13:15:19 -0500


I was under the impression that If you have elevated radials and if you
take even one to the ground you might as well move all to the
ground..??Fred KB4QZH

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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: 160m Band opening phenomena

[Artek Manuals]

Here in Florida in the evenings we get a fairly consistent opening to 
Europe it begins about 1 hour BEFORE local Sunset (2215Z) , Peaks about 
1/2 hour before Sunset and then all but dies out on most nights by 15min 
after official sunset. Later around 0200Z things slowly build back up 
till around local sunrise Europe. Last night during this opening I 
actually was seeing more EU' stations as I was NA?


Our sunrise opening is more traditional sunrise +/- 15 minutes to Asia 
and the Pacific Islands


Cant say what it was before since the last tme I was on 160 from Florida 
before 2019/2020 season was back in 1985-1990 time frame


Dave NR1DX

On 12/16/2020 7:16 AM, Kees Nijdam wrote:
Nothing wrong with conditions. Yesterday afternoon I worked K9FD in 
Hawaii and this morning the west coast and WL7SJ.

Good propagation to Japan also.

Kees, PE5T

Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10

Van: Roger Kennedy
Verzonden: woensdag 16 december 2020 13:12
Aan: topband@contesting.com
Onderwerp: Topband: 160m Band opening phenomena


Well Bob my own experience these days when working NA stations is that the
peak occurs at least 3 hours after Sunset and at least 3 hours before
Sunrise. (and that is obviously not a Tropical path)

Years ago there was definitely a peak both at their Sunset and our 
Sunrise,
typically around 10dB . . . but I don't think I have noticed that for 
around
a decade. As mentioned previously, signals seem to actually drop off 
around

Sunrise (both ways)

I obviously have no idea what has brought about this change . . . just one
of the many mysteries of 160m Propagation !

Roger G3YRO


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


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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: EZNEC Ground Errors

[Artek Manuals]

OR

The propagation mode on 160 is not what we have popularly come to "Accept".

There is a growing body of evidence that particularly at gray line that 
signals often arrive at a higher angles. This is often attributed to 
"ducting" . Maybe a lot more of 160 intercontinental propagation is  due 
ducting rather than the more commonly thought of low angle earth to F 
layer hop/multi-hop stuff seen at higher frequencies?


Where do i get a pair of those glasses that lets me look at radio waves 
so I actually see them arrive


Dave
NR1DX

On 12/11/2020 8:58 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:

Guy I have ALWAYS thought that the various Computer-based modelling of
Ground and its effect on Antennas is WAY off . . .

And surely the errors are MOST significant on 160m, not just because
Antennas are near the ground (in wavelength terms) . . . but also because
even the ground 130 ft deep is still going to have an effect . . . and there
is no way EZNEC can possibly take that into account, even if you KNEW what
was underneath your topsoil !

In my particular case it's not the effect on Verticals on 160m that interest
me . . . it's the effect on a Low Dipole.

Any DX stations I work on 160m will confirm I put out a pretty respectable
signal . . . my signal reports around the world and more recently I am able
to compare my RBN Reports across NA and they tend to be very similar to the
other British DXers.

However, most people are surprised to discover that for the last 50 years I
have always used a Horizontal Half Wave dipole on 160m, at around 50ft.

BUT I believe that EZNEC plots showing that most of the RF is just very High
Angle is WRONG . . . that's because in practice the Ground underneath it is
rubbish . . . so the Dipole's effective height above Ground is much higher.

And in fact, it seems that most people who have Dipoles on 160m mounted over
or near a very comprehensive Radial system DO get poor results using them
for DX . . . but that goes to confirm my theory (which is all based on my
actual experience on Top Band)

Roger G3YRO

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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: I need help proofing an Inverted L model I made please. 40’ x 143’, four 100’ radials, #14 wire.

[Artek Manuals]

Jim et all

I agree with what you say on all points when it comes to radials on the 
ground and salt water affects.


However I have always wondered about elevated radials . The NEC ( both 2 
and 4) models (not that those are to always be trusted) show very little 
(if any) improvement beyond four elevated radials, you have any theories 
on why that is? Intuitively (also not to be trusted) that is a lot of 
real estate in the spaces between


Dave
NR1DX

On 12/11/2020 4:37 AM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 12/10/2020 11:14 PM, Raymond Benny wrote:
With said, I believe my ground absorption is very high so I feel the 
higher
numbers of radials helps greatly with my vertical efficiency and 
radiation.


Hi Ray,

The soil affects us in two important ways. First, poor soil burns 
transmitter power underneath the antenna and it's near field. We use 
radials to shield the soil from the field, and to supply a low 
impedance path for return current. Magnetic fields produced around 
each radial by virtue of current flow couples loss in the earth into 
the radials in the form of series resistance. Loss in each radial is 1 
squared R; each time we double the number of radials the current in 
each is divided by two, so the power coupled to the earth by each 
divides by four. So the more radials, the less power is coupled to the 
earth. THAT'S why more is better. The result of all this is that loss 
in the soil under the antenna reduces the total strength of our signal 
by that amount.


The second effect of soil is in the far field, where we field radiate 
hits the earth and is reflected by it to form the vertical pattern. 
The better the conductivity THERE, the our pattern will be both 
stronger and at a lower angle. An antenna with its base just above sea 
water is the extreme example of this -- the reflection is extremely 
strong, and it is at a VERY low angle.


We can help the first of these two effects with a good radial system, 
but the only thing we can do about the second (the far field 
reflection), is to move where there is better soil. Most of us live 
where we do because we like living there for reasons other than radio. 
And that includes me and my XYL.


73, Jim K9YC

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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: I need help proofing an Inverted L model I made please. 40

[Artek Manuals]

Especially if you have elevated radials you will need a choke otherwise 
the coax and your shack will become part of the ground plane. . In my 
case I have a choke ( for common mode currents) and UNUN to match the 25 
ohm impedance of the antenna to 50 ohms. In some installations the 
common modes� can be quite large . The choke on my� 60'-"t" is eight 
ft-240-31 cores with 4 turns of coax. At 4 cores, the cores would get 
hot enough after 10 minutes at legal limit that were too hot to touch. 
With ground mounted radials the common mode problem is usually a lot lower.



YMMV
Dave
NR1DX

On 12/10/2020 2:17 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 12/10/2020 4:33 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote:

I've never understood what is gained by using a balun at the feedpoint
in this application.�� The feedline is unbalanced as is the load.
What's the point of a balun.


That's the problem with the word "balun." A CHOKE is needed at the 
feedpoint so that the feedline does not become a radial.


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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Need Opinion on DXE RPS-1 or RPS-2 Preamp

[Artek Manuals]

Ed

What receiver do you have now? You may not need a preamp at all?
Have you tried the BOG without a preamp yet?

Dave

On 12/3/2020 4:42 AM, Edward via Topband wrote:

Sorry.  Meant RPA 1 or 2.


On 3 Dec 2020, at 12:38 PM, Edward  wrote:

Any good?  If not this one, which preamp would you recommend for a BOG antenna?

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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: FW: CQWW a bust this year

[Artek Manuals]

Wes

You got that right,you gotta walk a mile in the other guys shoes!!

When I lived in New Hampshire working EU on 160 was a walk in the park 
compared to the kind of propagation we get down here in FL
or what the guys out west have to EU ( I did a stint as N7EX for a while 
in Spokane) ...


Dave
NR1DX

On 12/2/2020 6:52 PM, Wes wrote:

You left out location, location, location...:-)

Wes� N7WS

On 12/1/2020 4:21 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:

Hi Nick,

I have a limited setup, only an inverted L over an FCP on 160 (not like
W3LPL's 160m 4 square cannon). With basically no time to operate, I 
managed
about 60 minutes in three spells on 160m, 45 QSO's, 17 zones, 30 
countries,

all S&P.

I worked EU and AF in zones: 14: 4, 15: 7, 16: 1,� 20:1, 33: 1, 35: 
1.� Not

sure the 45/17/30 in one hour on 160 from a modest station allows room to
blame things on the band.

Good antenna for RX, and an EFFICIENT transmit antenna are always key to
making it. These will be even MORE important for 160 success as we 
make our

way into cycle 25.

160 seemed slow this time, but I didn't hear nearly as many stations 
on the

band, weak *or* loud, as in the past. Think they were having too much fun
on the higher bands in conditions which are most likely the opening round
of solar cycle 25 propagation. Get ready to do DXCC on 6 meters this time
around.

73, Guy K2AV



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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: CQWW and 160

[Artek Manuals]

Ron

Count me in , I agree no same country contacts, PERIOD
AND you wouldn't loose any zones ..zones 3, 4 and 5 are covered in 
Canada as well!


Dave
NR1DX



On 12/1/2020 12:27 PM, Ron Spencer via Topband wrote:
Here too in central NC conditions were, at best, poor. Bad prop and 
lots of QRN. However did manage to work 38 countries. And had a 
reasonable run last hour of contest.




However, checking the stats, almost 1/3 of logged Qs were with US 
stations. Perhaps more. Several times I stopped calling CQ because all 
I was getting were US callers. Really not what I wanted, at all.




Because of this I've sent a note to the contest contact for CQ 
suggesting they eliminate all points, including zone points, for same 
country contacts. Yes, we here in the US would loose 3 zones but its 
level across the country. This would eliminate all same country 
callers which, if my experience is representative, would increase the 
number and length of time of stations calling cq. At least here in the US.




Hope to work lots of folks from everywhere this weekend!



Ron

N4XD


Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: CQWW a bust this year

[Artek Manuals]

Conditions certainly didn't favor 160 over the weekend CQWW contest here 
in Florida at least.


Looking back in 2019 I worked 50 countries on 160 during CQWW, this year 
it was only 17, only 3 Europeans and those were very weak. I'm sure the 
lack of expeditions due to CV-19 played a part but on whole I think many 
guys in hindsight will be glad they didn't spend the money to go.


Maybe things will pick up next weekend for the ARRL 160 test though that 
tends to be largely a USA to USA test and it is hard to hear the DX 
through the local mob


CU guys in the pile up

Dave
NR1DX
--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: 7Q7

[Artek Manuals]

Tom

I'm using a 470 foot E/W Beverage here  in Florida on receive and a 60' 
high "T"  with four 90' elevated radials for transmit (TS890/KPA1500) . 
The CW operation the first night was quite a QSB roller coaster and I 
had no success catching the right xmit frequency  with the peaks. The 
second night on FT8 I was a bit luckier finally logging them at 02:15 
though they were not as strong on average as the first night. For 
comparison a friend, 30 miles south of me who lives on an ocean access 
salt water canal only heard one decode all night on his 65' high 
inverted V ( He usually kicks my behind on 80M though)


My sense is that the propagation favored the upper Midwest the first 
night and that Europe clearly had the edge the 2nd night, It did not 
seem to be all that many USA getting through.


Dave
NR1DX



On 11/20/2020 12:28 PM, Drew Vonada-Smith wrote:

Tom,

He was about S6 the other night in Kansas.  First heard 2330Z, but much better 
from 0010 to 0030Z.  I worked him at 0020Z in about ten calls.  Antenna was an 
inverted L, and RX was a 650 ft Bev to the SE.  He was similar strength on the 
NE Bev as SE, but my noise level is much higher NE.

73,
Drew K3PA


Message: 5
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 18:12:07 + (UTC)
From: Thomas Hoyer 
To: "k2q...@gmail.com" ,  "k2av@gmail.com"

Cc: "topband@contesting.com" 
Subject: Re: Topband: Wednesday CW DX Activity Night
Message-ID: <663192482.321269.1605809527...@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Would be interested in hearing (no pun intended) what type of antenna you, or 
anyone heraing the 7q7, are using
TomW3TA



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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: [TowerTalk] Feed Point Choke Question

[Artek Manuals]

Jim

Not asking anyone to debate anything... Just asking for real world 
physical measurement that the difference in this particular case is 
measurable and significant


I am from Missouri ( really) ...show me

Dave
NR1DX

On 11/7/2020 1:56 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
I will not be drawn into debates about scientific concepts that have 
long been well understood.


73, Jim K9YC

On 11/6/2020 12:58 PM, Artek Manuals wrote:

Jim

Show me the ACTUAL antenna range pattern measurement data  with and 
without the common mode choke on a a similar antenna, with a 
reasonable SWR ( LESS THAN 1.5:1)  and the feed line has been brought 
down perpendicular to the plane of the antenna and I will concede you 
the point


Dave
NR1DX


On 11/6/2020 3:37 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 11/6/2020 12:28 PM, Artek Manuals wrote:
The short answer is how tight you make the turns will have little 
real world effect. 


That short answer is WRONG.

Use the RG-8X I would probably use the #31 core over the
43 . The poor mans 8 turns of coax 4-5" in diameter without 
ferrites will probably actually work as well. 


Define "work." The important thing a choke should do is kill common 
mode current on the feedline that couples noise to the antenna and 
fills in nulls in the antenna's pattern. That "poor man's" solution 
won't do much for that. If "work" means it won't overheat, yes, it 
would "work."


Depending on SWR and feed line dressing (always perpendicular to 
the plane of the beam the need for choke at all� is arguable


It's arguable only if you don't understand the problem, or don't 
care about noise or the antenna's nulls.


73, Jim K9YC
___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
towert...@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk




___



___
TowerTalk mailing list
towert...@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Radial wire

[Artek Manuals]

 Bill

Arcing is probably not an issue at least for the 1st couple of years. I 
guess at some point 10 years down the road and your bargain wire is 
likely not UV resistant rated (?) Over time it will weather and crack ., 
running 1.5KW on FT8 you run the risk of setting the grass or leaf 
litter on fire eventually 8^)


At the 100W level your at now not much risk of arcing IMO.

Dave
NR1DX

On 11/6/2020 4:55 PM, cqtestk4xs--- via Topband wrote:

"For whatever weird reason, the price of insulated wire is
nearly always lower than the equivalent bare wire.  And
Romex sells for less than the equivalent individual wires."
I agree.  I recently picked up a 5000 ft roll of insulated 20AWG for a little 
over $100 shipped.  Plenty enough to run 30 radials.
I too woul dlike to know if you can cross insulated wires without soldering.  
Planning on puttin up a 4 square for 80 at my new station in V31 and if you 
don't have to solder them it would be a great.
Bill K4XS/KH7XS/V31XX
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: OT - Bonding Radials at Intersections

[Artek Manuals]

Among other things they will and can arc if very close or even 
intermittently touching. if they are not bonded the currents and 
voltages on each wire may be different enough to arc then you get 
interesting things going on especially at high power,. I had a related 
experience where I had radial wires stapled on a wooden fence. At one 
point two of the wires crossed each other, during a high power 
transmission the two arced repeatedly and set the fence on fire. Luckily 
the window of the shack faced the back yard and I saw it early on and 
went out an put the fire out and resolved the cause


Dave

NR1DX

On 11/6/2020 4:27 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:



On 11/6/2020 1:10 PM, Carl Clawson wrote:

Frank,

“Must” is a strong word. What goes wrong if you cross them?

73, Carl WS7L



Also, if insulated wires are used for radials that cross
over each other, is that to be treated differently than bare
metal wires that cross over each other and touch
so as to have electrical connectivity?

Does it matter if cross over radials are soldered at the
crossovers, so as to prevent parasitic "diodes".

For whatever weird reason, the price of insulated wire is
nearly always lower than the equivalent bare wire.  And
Romex sells for less than the equivalent individual wires.

Rick N6RK
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Solar Flux Question

[Artek Manuals]

Bill

Last night ON 160 I worked 32 European and SA stations with the reported 
SFI of 88.  earlier in the week with a similar SFI number I heard 
nothing from EU on 160. Conclusion : At these levels SFI is not the factor


Conditions on 15 and 12 have been for the last week or so been great . 
Lots of long path on 40 through 15 depending on the time of day & band. 
certainly far better than a year ago at SFI of 68-72 on the upper bands, 
on 160 and 80 hasn't been much of factor so far


DAVE
nr1dx


On 11/6/2020 3:23 PM, Bill Stewart wrote:

Per WWV, the solar flux is at 91. What, if any, affect does this have on 
propagation in HF or other
frequency bandsand of course 160 meters. I have seen these geophysical 
numbers often, but
never really understood what they meant. The flux has been running in the high 
60s/low 70s until
a few weeks ago when I saw it in the 80s.
Tnx de Bill K4JYS
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Phased staggered beverages

[Artek Manuals]

I think the spacing is a bit wide  try something more on the order of 
250-270' ( goes through the middle of the house right 8^)


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/18/2020 11:20 AM, Kenny Silverman wrote:

My new house has 6 wooded acres in roughly a square. For EU, I was hoping to 
get a pair of phased 500’ beverages spaced 350’ apart. To do that, one of the 2 
beverages will be 110’ in front of the other due to the lot-line orientation.  
Regardless of the phasing I’m modeling, the side and back lobes are not to my 
liking. Is the 110’ forward stagger too far?   I can get a single 600’ beverage 
to Eu which has a marginally  worse RDF (0.35 less) than the 
not-perfect-staggered-pair but is much simpler and takes up less land.

How much RDF increase does it take to be audible?

Regards , Kenny K2KW
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Wednesday CW DX Activity Night

[Artek Manuals]

Roger

I am curious, why Wednesday night ( when many have to get up and go to 
work the next morning?) instead of Friday or Saturday?


Was on.. on and off� the only station on CW early in the evening was 
OX/OZ1AHJ.. and then a "G"� a bit later but was who ever it was in 
and out of the QSB couldn't pull it out. It is still early here in the 
season. We are about as far south as you can get in the USA (FL) so we 
don't get the propagation like the fellows up in New England do.


JA's were in strong this morning at sunrise

We are an equal opportunity operator and there were a couple of Russians 
on FT8 not much else heard here on that mode either


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/15/2020 7:05 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
Great to work so many NA stations last night . . . and good to hear so 
many

other EU stations on the band.

Conditions were pretty good too . . . always nice to receive some S9 
reports

!

Look forward to working many of you on Saturday in The Stew Perry Contest.

73 Roger G3YRO



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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: 80 and 160

[Artek Manuals]

Ron et all

Same here not the first DX station at our ( FL ) Sunrise. I called a 
couple of times and did not even show up in VK/ZL on PSK Reporter which 
I usually do at sunrise. I then slid up to 80 and there were JA's a VK's 
and then I got called by a YC8 for a new on one 80 . Guess the LUF was 
3.5 MHz. About 3 hours later EU was booming in in 15M ..S9 signals all 
over the place Loudest I have heard 15 in years...a sharp MUF cutoff not 
a peep on 12M ..Odd condx all around


Dave\
NR1DX

On 10/12/2020 5:59 PM, Ron Spencer via Topband wrote:

For the first time in weeks didn't hear any DX on 160 this morning. On the 
upside, did work VK6LW on 80 lp at around 2155. Did it with just 100W from my 
end. Kevin has had a consistent, and consistently strong, long path signal on 
3506 for the last couple weeks. Well past his sunrise there and well before my 
sunset here in NC.



Ron

N4XD

Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Good Conditions, Little Activity

[Artek Manuals]

DELETE, DELETE DELETE

AT LEAST CHANGE TO SUBJECT LINE ON THE THREAD IF YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO 
TURN THIS INTO A FT8 BASHING SESSION , WHICH AS I RECALL THE 
MODERATOR/LIST OWNER BANNED LAST YEAR


TALK ABOUT A WASTE OF BANDWIDTH

DAVE

On 10/9/2020 1:02 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 10/9/2020 7:54 AM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:

Well, FT8 does some really good things that typical CW operation doesn�t
usually want to bother with.

1) use of a calling frequency (�SSB� �carrier� frequency)
2) constant monitoring
3) highly efficient use of VERY close frequencies.� Never needs retuning.
4) computer driven to allow attention to band over broad time spans.
5) technical attention to issues effectively resulting in improved
sensitivity
6) dB above noise replaces ancient RST signal reports.


Yes, all good characteristics. Another is a spot-reporting system 
(PSKReporter) that plots reception and QSO reports on a world map that 
can be zoomed. Each user can ask it to show reports, band by band, by 
mode, and for time periods that increment exponentially from 15 
minutes to 24 hours. Most WSJT software can be configured to 
automatically make those reports, and the default is ON. It's a great 
way to study propagation in close to real time!


But the dominant one for me is the higher noise level both at my QTH 
and at the stations I'm trying to work; these noise levels have 
increased gradually over the years to the extent that CW QSOs I could 
make to EU from my QTH in NorCal in 2006-9 I can no longer make during 
the corresponding part of this solar cycle. And my station is better 
now than it was in 2006-9. FT8 has a signal to noise advantage of 
about 10 dB over CW with great ops on both ends of the QSO.


During the current solar cycle, I've heard a total of seven CW signals 
from EU, and managed to work two of them. During that earlier solar 
cycle, my first since moving to W6 from W9, I logged a dozen or so EU 
countries. Over the past two seasons of the current solar cycle, I've 
added nearly 20 EU countries to my 160M DXCC count, all FT8.


My computer didn't make those QSOs -- it didn't build my station, nor 
did it design and build my antenna farm, it didn't know anything about 
propagation or when to call or how to call. I did all of that.


I'm glad that folks enjoy trans-Aatlantic ragchewing; I don't -- it 
bores me. I'm an engineer, station builder, and contester. CW 
contesting is my preferred mode.


73, Jim K9YC


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


--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: BOG Front to back

[Artek Manuals]

Mike

I have taken the liberty of changing to subject line to more accurately 
reflect the content of your reply on the Waller Flag thread


After much reading and a lot of personal experience and experimentation 
I am of the opinion that BOG front-to-back is a function not only the 
length but the soil type as well.


I experimented with 350',  300', 250', and 200'  long bogs all in the 
same direction, In my case the shorter 200' long BOG, over very dry , 
well drained, sandy soil clearly had better F/B than the 250' , 300', 
350'   ( F/B on the 350' was the worst of all of them..anyone want some 
50' pieces of RG6?) . When I run out of other things to do I plan on 
trying a 175' and 150' but not in the next year.


A friend of mine living in another part of the country compared his 200' 
BOG on laid  top of rich Midwest farm loam to mine and  was very 
surprised that my front to back was so much better than his. What the 
optimal length is for his particular soil is still TBD. Another friend 
with sandy soil but in a very near salt water environment ( he lives 
along a  canal with ocean access, i.e salt water)  also reported poor 
front to back , for sure we surmise his soil is much more conductive 
than mine) .


The moral I guess is I would start shortening your BOG and see if the 
front to back improves


Dave

PS: I too use RG6 for all my BOGS and the feedlines and a dozen or more 
turns on a #31 torroid at each end of a 125' feed lines significantly 
reduces broadcast band induced signals



On 9/12/2020 8:26 AM, Mikek wrote:




 My Technical knowledge is limited but, I have built directional AMBCB 
antennas. Feed line isolation is critical to make a directional 
antenna, directional! I have been criticized and been told, coax cable 
does not pick up signal. Must be I don't use the right coax.


This from a previous post I made after I ran out and tested a 230ft 
Coax and a 230ft 18ga twisted speaker wire, to see what BCB stations 
they received.


  "I found I received 13 stations with up to 5.5 S units on the 
properly terminated coax. I tried many things to reduce signal pickup, 
chokes, transformers, grounds, several chokes and transformers, but 
could never get it to be quiet. So after reading some info about 
phased antennas using speaker wire, I ran a twisted speaker wire out 
to where my antenna was to start.
After terminating that, I found I only received 4 stations, 3 were 
audible but at zero on my S meter and one that was almost 1 S unit.
Do I think the speaker wire has more loss than the coax probably, but, 
I seem to have plenty of signal and it doesn't have much

signal ingress compared to the coax."

  I have since went to Cat5 cable for my receive antenna. I started in 
my haste just connecting Cat5 to my radio, terrible idea, but I 
learned from it.


 I tried several things to quiet the Cat5 and came up with something 
that works very well for quieting the Cat5 in_MY_ situation.


I have the 235ft of Cat5 connected to a 260ft (property limited) BOG 
that I use mostly for the AMBCB. The BOG points N/S, it seems to have


attenuated side lobes but not much front to back.

 After reading a Laird Cat5 common mode article, I used their info to 
help me build my signal ingress reduction box. If you're interested in 
seeing what


worked for me, click here.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/e1lq7fxv0kggi5d/bog%20final%20design%20may%2030%202020%20common%20mode%20attenuator.jpg?dl=0 


KF4ITA Mike Knowlton










--
Dave manu...@artekmanuals.com www.ArtekManuals.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Some experiments with a short beverage, not succeeding very well

[Artek Manuals]

Mark

Tell us more about the transformer? My own experience is that core 
material and impedance matching at the frequency of interest often pays off.


I have a 200' BOG (N-S) and a 460ft� x 6ft Beverage (E-W) . Both 
antennas work very well for what they are comparing them to what I hear 
on the Xmit antenna. In the "development " phase I found that measuring 
the actual feedpoint impedance and then making sure that the impedance 
matching� ratios are "close" resulted� in very predictable and 
repeatable results. I dont have my notes handy , and both my antennas 
are essentially "Reversible" coax antennas. One transformer turned out 
to be 3:1 and the other 5:1. I get performance on 160-40, noticeable 
poorer performance 30M� and� very poor signal signal 20M and above. I 
attribute this to the matching transformer design which favors the lower 
frequencies.


Everything for the moment was done using� cheap RG-6. But I will be 
replacing all of that with a RG-58 construction in the fall.


Dave
NR1DX

On 6/30/2020 2:56 PM, Mark Lunday wrote:

"Beverages just want to work" is what I have heard.

Not having much luck with that here. I suspect operator/installation 
error.


I did a lot of reading and I must be doing something wrong.



* 250 feet of insulated wire strung out in 030 degrees direction 
toward EU, pretty straight, varying in height from 4 to 6 feet, 
running through thick brush with no metal objects or artificial 
elements along the run.

* 9:1 transformer at feed point with ground rod
* 300 feet of coax, mix of RG-8, MMR-400 to get to the edge of the 
woods from the house

* No terminating resistor

On bands 160-40, the signals are very weak. I am monitoring WSPR, FT8. 
I can hear signals on 160-40 but they are way down compared to dipoles 
and inverted L on the same bands. Like 20-30 db down. From what I 
read, I should NOT need an HF pre-amplifier, right?


Signals on 30 and 20 seem to be better and I can copy some DX from EU 
on FT8.


I will try installing a new ground rod, the old one is 10 years old 
and perhaps not making a good ground connection at the feedpoint. The 
transformer is brand new, so that's not an issue. The coax has tested 
out fine. Soil is central North Carolina clay, a bit dry at this time.


I am guessing performance is poor on 160-40 because of the short 
length and that it's bi-directional (no terminating resistor), which I 
am seeing on 30 meters. But I did not think it would be THIS bad on 
160-40


Mark Lunday, WD4ELG
Greensboro, NC FM06be
wd4...@arrl.net
http://wd4elg.blogspot.com
SKCC #16439 FISTS #17972 QRP ARCI #16497

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Spectrum

[Artek Manuals]

Rick

I have had Spectrum in the past but dont� a tthe moment , never had a 
problem...BUT a lot of vatables can play inot this


This can be a function of grounds ( at the radio and at the Spectrum 
distribution box). I t can also be an unlucky choice of cable lengths 
which turned out to be resonant at just right frequency. I would suggest 
that you check all the grounds and then add some chokes At top band a 
couple of dozen clip-ons at the inputs to the cable box and other 
equipment .


Does your 160M antenna run close to or in parallel with�� the main Cable 
TV line coming into the house ?


Dave
NR1DX

On 5/29/2020 1:02 PM, rick darwicki via Topband wrote:

Hi all,
I had Uverse TV and 1 KW blew away their modem, anyone operating QRO 
using Spectrum for TV, Phone and Internet ?
I assume would have a box with DVR and WIFI.� Any problem with any 
feature being blown away or hash in recorded programs?
If it works better than my ATT and DirecTV I might go for my second 
100on Topband hi hi

Thanks

Rick N6PE

==


Dying is easy, the hard part is living







On Friday, May 29, 2020, 09:00:47 AM PDT, 
 wrote:

Send Topband mailing list submissions to
��� topband@contesting.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
��� http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
��� topband-requ...@contesting.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
��� topband-ow...@contesting.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."


Today's Topics:

� 1. 160M shunt fed choke (tony@verizon.net)
� 2. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (Jim Brown)
� 3. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (tony@verizon.net)
� 4. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (Jim Brown)
� 5. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (Raymond Benny)
� 6. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (tony@verizon.net)
� 7. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (fmoeves)
� 8. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (Jim Brown)
� 9. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (Jim Brown)
� 10. Re: 160M shunt fed choke (Wes N7WS)


--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 11:57:56 -0400
From: 
To: 
Subject: Topband: 160M shunt fed choke
Message-ID: <0a7201d63508$c1827090$448751b0$@verizon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;��� charset="us-ascii"

I shunt feed my tower on 160M. The feed is about 4' above the base of the
tower. I use a vacuum cap beta match. I use three vacuum caps. I have a
vacuum relay to switch between high and low 160M. The coax from the 
shack is

all underground to the base of the tower. The shield of the coax and the
matching network is grounded to a tower leg.

Is there a potential benefit to adding a ferrite core choke for this 
type of

setup?� I can easily add one inside the match box. I could follow K9YC's
info for a 18 turn RG-400 on a 2.4" #31 core.

Tnx for any feedback

N2TK, Tony



--

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 10:36:53 -0700
From: Jim Brown 
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: 160M shunt fed choke
Message-ID:
��� <7ad4aa2c-8cc6-4512-2599-d663fe98b...@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

On 5/28/2020 8:57 AM, tony.kaz--- via Topband wrote:
Is there a potential benefit to adding a ferrite core choke for this 
type of

setup?

What do you have for a radial system?� That's the primary determining
factor. The choke prevents the coax from being used as a radial. If you
have a robust radial system, that's far less of an issue.

73, Jim K9YC


--

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 14:06:21 -0400
From: 
To: ,��� 
Subject: Re: Topband: 160M shunt fed choke
Message-ID: <0c0301d6351a$b1d90520$158b0f60$@verizon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;��� charset="us-ascii"

Hi Jim,
In ground radials - 60. Length 60-100' depending on direction due to a 
close

in stone wall in one direction.
All the coax is buried and all the shields are tied to the tower legs 
about

a foot up the tower after the leave the ground.

N2TK, Tony

-Original Message-
From: Topband  On
Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 1:37 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: 160M shunt fed choke

On 5/28/2020 8:57 AM, tony.kaz--- via Topband wrote:

Is there a potential benefit to adding a ferrite core choke for this
type of setup?

What do you have for a radial system?� That's the primary determining
factor. The choke prevents the coax from being used as a radial. If 
youhave

a robust radial system, that's far less of an issue.

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




--

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 11:41:45 -0700
From: Jim Brown 
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: 160M shunt fed choke
Message-ID:
��� <843d3836-6a7d-4f5e-cef2-36

Re: Topband: Ground Conductivity

[Artek Manuals]

Ahhh ...but what about vertical antennas with elevated radials ?

On 3/24/2020 1:04 AM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 3/23/2020 9:05 PM, donov...@starpower.net wrote:

Excellent skin depth reference here:

www.antennasbyn6lf.com/files/ground_skin_depth_and_wavelength.pdf
Rudy is a great reference for anything he's chosen to study. An 
excellent engineer and scientist.


Ground characteristics are much more significant for vertical 
polarization

than for horizontal polarization.


I'll take that one step farther -- VERY significant for vertical 
polarized antennas, but hardly matters for horizontal antennas. With 
horizontal antennas, what matters most is electrical rigging height 
(and, of course, terrain).


73, Jim K9YC

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Ground Conductivity

[Artek Manuals]

On 160M the " skin depth" of ground goes beyond the grass ...so it 
depends on more than just your yard but also the type of soil 
underneath, how often it is watered , fertilized etc etc.


What are you trying to do that you need to know?

Dave
NR1DX

On 3/23/2020 6:01 PM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:

A quick question for the collective wisdom on this esteemed reflector:

How would one categorize the quality of ground consisting of grass. 
For example, if you live next to a large (many acres) open space made 
entirely of well watered grass, would that qualify as �average 
ground�, �above average ground� or something else?


Haven�t been able to find the answer anywhere.

Thanks for your input, as always!

73 es DX,

Bob/AA6VB
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: 300 ohm twin lead for bidirectional Beverage antennas

[Artek Manuals]

Since the relevant portion of the original post was not quoted not sure 
what the original problem was but


If your looking for an "easy" and reliable solution for a bi-directional 
beverage in a single run so to speak, look at a copy of "The Beverage 
Antenna Handbook" by Misek. He shows a Coaxial version ( I use RG6 but 
will likely be switching to a RG58/59 variant in the future) . The 
coaxial version shown by Misek can actually be fed anywhere along the 
antenna ( including an end) and need not be fed in the center without 
compromise. I have three here (a 460' Beverage and two 200' BOGs) 
Pointing at various compass points (N/S, NE/SW AND E/W). The beauty of 
the coaxial version is that it is a bidirectional with a single 
wire/cable. Early on I did some side by side A/B comparison switching of 
a classic 2 wire and coaxial 2 wire with no discernible difference.


I originally built my system with RG6 and Type F connectors. Problems 
have arisen in that it is near impossible to find good quality Female 
Type F connectors. the contact inside the connector either pushed out 
the back of the connector or has the retention force of a piece of 
tinfoil (yet another "gift" from PRC) . The net result is that I have 
been plagued with intermittent connections and am slowing changing my 
system over to PL259/SO239 connectors. This necessitates changing out 
the RG6 as well since the jacket on most RG6 is steel and aluminum and 
cant be soldered to adequately. So if you go this route I recommend 
PL259's connectors and a coax with a solderable braid


Typical "does it work"  comment worthy of a quote from dozens of QST 
article" I have worked a lot of DX with these antennas that I could not 
hear on T top vertical" . Actually I have worked 132  countries on 160  
in just 8 months after getting back on the band after a 10 year hiatus.


See you in the pile ups
Dave
NR1DX


On 2/29/2020 12:16 PM, Ham Hicks wrote:

As I recall from the practice of years past, 300 ohm was the only way to
hook up to a TV or FM broadcast antenna. There was both the flat variety,
and a round design. The round type greatly reduced the rain / snow
degradation as the "field" was completely within the line, and it was much
stronger.  Maybe someone still has some of that tucked away.
Ham
KB4BR

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces+ham306=bellsouth@contesting.com]
On Behalf Of Ned Mountain
Sent: Saturday, February 29, 2020 10:02 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: 300 ohm twin lead for bidirectional Beverage antennas

Hi Joe,

  


Have as look at the reviews of this bi directional Beverage.  I have been
involved with the design and testing for the past 11 years.  The ease and
convenience of working with low cost RG-6 for all antenna elements is a
blessing.

  

  


https://www.eham.net/reviews/view-product?id=14379

  


Ned

WC4X

  

  

  

  


Ned Mountain

ned.mount...@mindspring.com

770 823 4205 (M)

  


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

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: ARRL CW Contest

[Artek Manuals]

NR1DX:

Equipment: 1400W + 60' (20M) high  "T" with 3 elevated radials + Bevs & BOGs
Location: Near Tampa Florida


Here in Florida, except for Africa and the Carib, we typically do not 
enjoy the same good condx to EU that you fellows up north get the price 
we pay for not having to use our amplifiers to heat the basement

Friday Night: Very poor all EU just above the noise, very slow QSB
Saturday AM: Hand full of Caribbean, NO ZL/VK/JA
Saturday PM: Much better, band opened  45 minutes before our 
sunset,,tapered off a bit after sunset then built up as the Evening wore on

Sunday AM. one KH6 but otherwise still no Pacific stations heard here
Sunday PM: poor condx again like Friday, no pre-sunset opening, only a 
few weak EU's heard after sunset


General: We were strictly search and pounce for a total of 98-Q's in 51 
countries. Lots of good ops on both sides.
 Why a few stations feel compelled to send at 50wpm on topband with the 
noise levels as they are  is a mystery. 35wpm  is plenty fast enough for 
the conditions. I guess they get to send a few more unanswered CQ's per 
hour while we try and figure out is that an S or H? Did he bust my call 
?...better ask for fill.



Sorry I missed you Roger


Dave
NR1DX




73 Roger G3YRO



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

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Topband: RDF vs F/B

[Artek Manuals]

Steve et all

I think both characteristics of receiving antennas are important 
depending on your location and the types of noise you are looking to 
"minimize"


For those of you (and I at one time)  who have the good fortune to be 
located in relative quiet rural / remote environments like the north 
woods 90km north of Calgary with little or no "man made" noise then I 
would agree that RDF is probably a better figure to use. There you are 
generally dealing with atmospherics rather than SMPS and variable speed 
furnace motors.


For those who have to live in the city or burbs then front to back may 
be a more useful in getting rid of a specific noise source. In fact 
Misek's steerable Beverages might be even more useful.


Increasingly though few of us in Suburban locations are dealing with 
only one noise source as we are surrounded by them. Surrounded by 3, 4 
or more man made point sopurces

Now which characteristic do I lean towards?

Dave
NR1DX

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Beverage performance VS term resistor

[Artek Manuals]

Thanks...I did not know that. I am running Eznec+ 6.0 here which is 
based on a version of NEC2 but the GUI doesn't address RDF ( will have 
to give Lewellyn a poke about that 8^)


Dave
NR1DX

On 1/24/2020 9:25 AM, Don Kirk wrote:

Hi Dave,

I use 4nec2 which is free, and it provides direct readout of the RDF 
value.


Don (wd8dsb)

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 9:21 AM Artek Manuals 
mailto:manu...@artekmanuals.com>> wrote:


Steve

I am curious, what antenna modeling program are you using that gives
direct readout in RDF? Or are you� "estimating"� it from the antenna
graphical pattern?

Dave
NR1DX
>> The recent experiments with my Beverages in the cold weather
has raised some comments about the termination resistor and the
antenna performance.� I received a few emails asking about F/B. I
made the comment that it really is'nt worth the effort trying to
get the termination value exact. Close is good enough.
>>
>> Changing the termination resistor value has only a limited
effect on the RDF of the antenna.� The F/B can change some what,
but the zenith and side rejection is mostly preserved independent
of the termination value.
>> This is well described by John in the the Lowband DXing book.
(5th edition, pg 7-64 �conclusions�)
>>
>> Today I did some modelling on a 920� wire.� RDF with a 500 Ohm
term is 11.7 dB, with 200 Ohm term it is 11.3 dB, and with 800 Ohm
term it is 11.4 dB.� So only about .4 dB of RDF change with a very
significant (+/- 300 Ohm) resistor change.� Looking at the azimuth
and Zenith plots, the front-to-side remains mostly unchanged while
rear lobes develop that diminish the F/B.� However, unless there
is a specific noise, or QRM problem from the back of the
Beverages, this will likely go un-noticed.� The important
parameter is RDF�.the rejection of noise in the full 3D hemisphere
compared to the max forward gain.
>>
>> In fact, I modelled no termination (by inserting 1 e6 Ohms as a
term resistor) and the RDF of the bi-directional Beverage is still
9.7 dB. (almost zero F/B) This is pretty decent, and is better
than many other small loop antennas and smaller arrays.� The
azimuth pattern still shows significant side and zenith rejection
which is why the RDF calculates so well.� This is perhaps why many
ops have had good success with bi-directional Beverages.
>>
>> If you are unfamiliar with what the RDF metric, Greg has a good
explanation here:
http://www.seed-solutions.com/gregordy/Amateur%20Radio/Experimentation/RDFMetric.htm
<http://www.seed-solutions.com/gregordy/Amateur%20Radio/Experimentation/RDFMetric.htm>
>>
>> 73, de steve ve6wz
>> ___
>>

-- Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com <http://www.ArtekManuals.com>

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



--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Beverage performance VS term resistor

[Artek Manuals]

Steve

I am curious, what antenna modeling program are you using that gives 
direct readout in RDF? Or are you  "estimating"  it from the antenna 
graphical pattern?


Dave
NR1DX

The recent experiments with my Beverages in the cold weather has raised some 
comments about the termination resistor and the antenna performance.  I 
received a few emails asking about F/B. I made the comment that it really is'nt 
worth the effort trying to get the termination value exact. Close is good 
enough.

Changing the termination resistor value has only a limited effect on the RDF of 
the antenna.  The F/B can change some what, but the zenith and side rejection 
is mostly preserved independent of the termination value.
This is well described by John in the the Lowband DXing book. (5th edition, pg 
7-64 “conclusions”)

Today I did some modelling on a 920’ wire.  RDF with a 500 Ohm term is 11.7 dB, 
with 200 Ohm term it is 11.3 dB, and with 800 Ohm term it is 11.4 dB.  So only 
about .4 dB of RDF change with a very significant (+/- 300 Ohm) resistor 
change.  Looking at the azimuth and Zenith plots, the front-to-side remains 
mostly unchanged while rear lobes develop that diminish the F/B.  However, 
unless there is a specific noise, or QRM problem from the back of the 
Beverages, this will likely go un-noticed.  The important parameter is RDF….the 
rejection of noise in the full 3D hemisphere compared to the max forward gain.

In fact, I modelled no termination (by inserting 1 e6 Ohms as a term resistor) 
and the RDF of the bi-directional Beverage is still 9.7 dB. (almost zero F/B) 
This is pretty decent, and is better than many other small loop antennas and 
smaller arrays.  The azimuth pattern still shows significant side and zenith 
rejection which is why the RDF calculates so well.  This is perhaps why many 
ops have had good success with bi-directional Beverages.

If you are unfamiliar with what the RDF metric, Greg has a good explanation here: 
http://www.seed-solutions.com/gregordy/Amateur%20Radio/Experimentation/RDFMetric.htm 


73, de steve ve6wz
___



--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Nasty QRM From ??

[Artek Manuals]

Dick

There are many sources that can generate this kind of "noise" . More 
common of recent are variable speed blower motors in modern furnaces and 
central A/C units. Next are cheap switch mode power supplies from a 
plethora of items, manufactured in PRC. And finally outdoor lights that 
come on at dark (Both LED and Mercury Vapor)


Since you have apparently killed all personal sources then it is likely 
coming from a nearby neighbor I have had them come from 1/2 mile away 
but not often . sources under a 1/4 mile are more likely. Tried� to look 
at your QTH on google earth but since you have multiple QTH's that 
wasn't possible


Dave
NR1DX

On 1/24/2020 1:59 AM, Dick Bingham wrote:

Greetings All

Here are my basic conditions:
- KiwiSDR (~DC-to-30MHz) or
- Apache-Labs 7000dle
- Dell laptop computer
- Both on battery power

I have cleaned up my system using chokes and filtering to the point
there are virtually no CM-signals entering the receiver when the feedline
at the antenna is disconnected and re-connected to a 50-ohm load.

When the antenna is reconnected I see desired signals PLUS an
unwanted comb-line with signals every ~98.4KHz (e.g. comb-lines span
2573.49KHz to 4355.38KHz resulting in 98.438KHz line spacings.)

These signals are frequency stable and not drifty. Shutting down the
house-mains with the receiver battery powered does not kill the QRM.

SO, it looks like something somewhere is generating this junk that 
runs from

the BC-band to >20MHz.

Have any of you encountered similar ~98.xxxKHz spurious signals ?

73 Dick/w7wkr at CN97uj
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: FCP results

[Artek Manuals]

Richard

Glad to hear you are having good results with your FCP.

What is the basis for your estimate of a 4-6 db improvement? Which prior 
antenna configuration was your improvement based on (or i.e. which was 
the 2nd runner-up)



Dave


On 1/20/2020 7:59 AM, Richard McLachlan wrote:
After trying buried radials, surface radials and elevated radials with 
my inverted L, I finally put up an FCP a few days ago. The difference 
is amazing and I reckon my signal into NA has gone up by 4-6 dB. As I 
only have a fairly small tree available the vertical section of the 
antenna only goes up to around 45 feet. The FCP is about 4 feet above 
ground at the moment so I will raise it a bit more as I think 8ft is 
the recommended height.


Richard
G3OQT


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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Topband resource

[Artek Manuals]

Roger

Apples and oranges

Your antenna is not a dipole but rather an Inverted V . Inverted V's 
have a significant "vertical" radiation component compared to a dipole


I am not sure how you can compare your performance to the W4RNL 
installation given your 750 miles north of there? Please explain the 
basis for your claim?


Dave
NR1DX


On 1/15/2020 10:58 AM, Roger Parsons via Topband wrote:

W8JI's experience with a horizontal dipole at 300 ft is often quoted as proof 
that only vertical antennas are useful for 160m DX. This is not my experience 
with a dipole with the centre at 320 ft and the ends at over 250'. In its 
favoured directions it is equal to a W4RNL half wave vertical array over a very 
large radial system. It is unsurprisingly not as good off the ends, and quite 
is useless for relatively local communications.
I am also inclined to support Roger, G3YRO, in his use of a low dipole, having 
myself successfully used relatively low horizontal antennas for DX in the past. 
There are most certainly times when higher angles are useful for DX - and 
possibly more frequently than we imagine. There actually have to be, otherwise 
Roger would never work any DX at all. Note, this does not mean that a good 
vertical antenna is not often or even usually better than a low horizontal one. 
Finally, the UK is small compared to many other countries, but it is not 
actually a tiny island. Roger's path to North America is over about 300 km of 
land, and he is more than 10km from the sea in any direction.

73 RogerVE3ZI/G3RBP
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Topband: 20kv 500pf....Re: de n7dd

[Artek Manuals]

Larry

You could always use two 10KV 1000pf in series might be easier to find

Dave
NR1DX
manu...@artekmanuals.com

On 1/8/2020 11:35 PM, Larry via Topband wrote:

does anyone know of a HV (20KV) capacitor with a value of approximately 500 pf 
that has a NPO value?
thanks in advance.
larry/n7dd
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Temporary antenna suggestion for 160

[Artek Manuals]

Frank

I agree with you if the elevated radials are "resonant" .� However my 
experience is the direct opposite with non resonant radials� for my 
elevated system. Mine are 90' long for 160M. So far this year I have 
worked 118 countries (102 confirmed) since getting back on the air� 
starting in May of this year. A little harder since we don't ( I can 
speak from prior experience) get as good� propagation typically to 
Europe and over the pole here in Florida as you guys up north get.


There was an article in the Spring 1997 Communications Quarterly by K5IU 
extolling the virtues of non resonate radials and how to match them 
which got me headed down the path. I could post a copy� I suppose but I 
need to have an understanding about the copy rights first.. You may find 
a copy on the web if you google long enough.



DaveNR1DX


On 12/18/2019 4:10 PM, donov...@starpower.net wrote:

Hi Csaba,


My experience is that an extensive radial system on the ground performs
significantly better than a few elevated radials. I suspect its 
difficult to

obtain nearly equal currents among a small number of elevated radials.


There is nothing wrong with gull wing elevated radials, but in my 
experience

they shorten the effective length of the vertical.


73
Frank
W3LPL

- Original Message -

From: "HA3LN" 
To: donov...@starpower.net
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 8:57:40 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Temporary antenna suggestion for 160

Hi Frank,

So the gull-wing elevated setup should be dropped from the performance
point of view, right?

I have a 26m spider-pole and just wondering how to setup the radials for
that but considering you wrote no sense to make the radials into
gull-wing then.

Thanks and 73!
Csaba HA3LN / HG3N
http://ha3ln.hu/


On 2019-12-16 22:04, donov...@starpower.net wrote:

Hi Mike,


Years ago my 4-square transmitting array used "gull-wing" elevated
radials sloping 45 degrees from the feedpoint at ground level to about
ten feet high.


When I replaced the radials with sixty 120-foot radials laid on the 
ground

I had to shorten the verticals by about five feet to maintain resonance,
suggesting that the current at the bottom five feet -- or so -- of 
the verticals
was attenuated by the sloping radials in close proximity to the 
verticals.



As an aside, the performance of the array improved dramatically...


73
Frank
W3LPL


- Original Message -

From: "Mike Waters" 
To: "thoyer" 
Cc: "topband" 
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:52:41 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Temporary antenna suggestion for 160

CORRECTION

It was just pointed out to me that I neglected to mention that the
feedpoint on my 160m inverted-L was much lower than 10 feet high!

The tuner sits on the earth, and the two wires go straight up from 
that to
the insulator block holding the antenna and the radials, which is 
less than

4 feet high.
From that point, the two radials angle upwards at roughly 45� (?) to 
nearby
trees, and level out at 10' high to the North and to the South all 
the way

to the ends. (The South radial zigzags back and forth since the distance
from the base to the neighbor's fence in that direction is less than 1/4
wavelength.)

I had photos of it online, but w0btu.com crashed. Looking for a place to
upload it to.

I hope this makes sense. Sorry for the lack of details below.

73, Mike
W0BTU


On Sun, Dec 15, 2019, 8:22 PM Mike Waters  wrote:


Do the inverted-L, but use at least two 10' high 1/4 wave radials.

Do NOT use an RF ground rod, or any radials on or near the earth. Just
connect the coax shield to the junction of the radials and any remote
tuner. At that point a good choke balun is necessary.

Leaving out the choke or grounding the shield will result in very poor
performance.

73, Mike
W0BTU


On Sun, Dec 15, 2019, 7:04 PM thoyer via Topband 


wrote:

With only 9 more to go for DXCC on 160 and all of the recent posts 
about
how good the band has been recently "best in years) I find 
myself with

no
antenna for the low bands and cringing after each post on how good the
band has been.
...
Options - I have a 45' tower with TH6DXX, 6m and 2m yagis. I could 
easily

string a makeshift inverted L with about 45' vertical and around 100'
horizontal. This I could string up in a few hours. the Horizontal 
portion
would be pointed south. Not the best of configurations but that's 
what I

have to work with. ...

Tom
W3TA




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


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



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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Temporary antenna suggestion for 160

[Artek Manuals]

2nd mike's point about the elevated radials if you have the room, and I 
underscore his point about not connecting the above gnd radials to earth 
ground and the need for a beefy common mode choke


Dave
NR1DX



On 12/15/2019 9:22 PM, Mike Waters wrote:

Do the inverted-L, but use at least two 10' high 1/4 wave radials.

Do NOT use an RF ground rod, or any radials on or near the earth. Just
connect the coax shield to the junction of the radials and any remote
tuner. At that point a good choke balun is necessary.

Leaving out the choke or grounding the shield will result in very poor
performance.

73, Mike
W0BTU


On Sun, Dec 15, 2019, 7:04 PM thoyer via Topband 
wrote:


With only 9 more to go for DXCC on 160 and all of the recent posts about
how
good the band has been recently "best in years) I find myself with no
antenna for the low bands and cringing after each post on how good 
the band

has been.
...
Options - I have a 45' tower with TH6DXX, 6m and 2m yagis. I could easily
string a makeshift inverted L with about 45' vertical and around 100'
horizontal. This I could string up in a few hours. the Horizontal portion
would be pointed south. Not the best of configurations but that's what I
have to work with. ...

Tom
W3TA



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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: BOG

[Artek Manuals]

You mean it will never be a BAG (Beverage Above Ground)?

Dave
NR1DX

On 12/3/2019 6:49 PM, K4SAV wrote:
You won't have any success trying to rename a BOG.  A BOG (Beverage On 
the Ground) is an accurate and appropriate name.  Harold's first 
"Beverage" was actually a BOG.  A short time later it was raised above 
ground and that is the antenna we now know as a Beverage. You won't 
have any success trying to rename a Beverage either.


Jerry, K4SAV
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: BOG

[Artek Manuals]

You sit around in the pub for long thinking these UP?
I just built a LOG myself ( Loop on Ground) ... I also modeled a SLOG ( 
square loop on ground) but decided that it wasn't very good


Dave
NR1DX

On 12/3/2019 5:56 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote:

polliwog

piece of long limp inductive wire on ground

  


Mike, Coreen & Corey

Keswick Ridge, NB

  


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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Topband: Odd (?) Propagation this Wednesday AM

[Artek Manuals]

I went to bed the 2nd time last night around 0900Z (not much to show for 
my 0700-0900 2 glass of water alarm. I decided to leave the computer and 
rig on 1840 listening to dreaded drone of the FT8 bees. I slept in and 
didn't get up till 1300Z an hour after my sunrise, Scanning the JTDX 
record to see what I had missed I was surprised to see decodes of a JA 
and 3D2AG almost an HOUR AFTER my sunrise !. There was indeed the 
sunrise bump  where I also copied those two stations which lasted about 
10minutes , Then about every 15 minutes the decode log showed the JA and 
3D2 they would pop in for single decode and sometimes 3 or4 before 
dropping out again


Dave
nr1dx

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Computer noise

[Artek Manuals]

Could be coming from the power supply? Sometimes simple clip on chokes 
are not enough either. I have a similar problem here on 20M I have dual 
(Identical) monitors . One has an irritating but not debilitating  spur 
on 20 the other doesn't ..If I swap the monitors the spur follows the 
monitor. Have tried a handful of ferrites to no avail so it is likely 
"radiated" IMO  and not conducted.


Grumpy Dave
NR1DX

On 11/26/2019 6:41 AM, Rodman, David wrote:

A few ideas might be helpful here.  I was at the station over the weekend and 
found a significant amount of noise coming from one of two computers in the 
station.  Significant noise S5 at 1820.  One computer runs the cluster and 2m 
connection.  That was clean.  The other handles most of the remote chores and 
has about 15 USB serial devices attached.  Everything was off, except a battery 
operated transceiver attached to the receive antenna feed, the modem for the 
cable and my router.  One can definitely see that operating the computer, 
closing windows or plugging in USB devices causes the modulation on the signal 
to change, this isolating the source to the computer alone and possible 
connections to peripherals (they were all turned off by the way).  I did have 
few chokes available but attaching them to the USB wires out of the computer to 
their various devices made no improvement.  I could get more specific but need 
to leave for my office now.  Any ideas might be helpful and appreciat
  ed.


---
David J Rodman MD
Assistant Clinical Professor
Department of Ophthalmology
SUNY/Buffalo

Office 716-857-8654
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


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

Re: Topband: H40TT on 160m

[Artek Manuals]

Thats great .NOT even an ESP hint here in the south east... I 
listened from 07:30Z to 12:00Z ...my reward was I did finally get to 
work 3D2AG who I have been "stalking" for months, so the band conditions 
were OK in that direction ...I guess the morning was not a total loss


Grumpy Dave
( time for a nap and a fig newton)
NR1DX


On 11/26/2019 7:41 AM, Wes wrote:

Worked this morning @1218Z.

On 11/25/2019 11:12 PM, John Zantek wrote:
To keep this on-topic, I worked H40TT on 20 SSB today and told him 
that we'd like some CW on topband. He said that was the other op, 
but thought he would be trying tonight (our morning).
That would have been Grant/KZ1W, who organized the trip and does 
SSB/FT8.� Rob/N7QT does the CW and is _very_ good.� Both are members 
of Western WA DX Club and are great fellows.� They're packing up and 
coming home on Thursday.� It's been a REALLY wet trip for them; there 
were delays in getting the low band receive antennas up, since the 
local boys couldn't safely climb the slippery trees in the 
rain/wind.� I was fortunate to work Rob the first night (my morning) 
they were on TB, then Grant the next night on digital.� There was 
also no Internet access, so back-channel comms were limited to Rob's 
Garmin InReach.


73 John W7CD


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




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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Topband: Speaking of 3D2AG

[Artek Manuals]

Speaking of 3D2AG

Does anyone know why Tony does not show any CW contacts ( 160 or 
otherwise) in his Online ( club-log) Log? The FT8 & FT4 confirmations 
are there but no CW. I have asked him a couple of times about it and he 
ignores the question ...odd


Grumpy Dave
 NR1DX

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Topband: OFF TOPIC: AMP NEEDS RIDE FROM DFW TO FL

[Artek Manuals]

Apologies in advance for off topic post

If there is anyone on the list in the DFW area that is DRIVING to 
FLORIDA between now and the end of the year?   I have an 80 lb amplifier 
( Alpha 9500) that needs a ride. Would obviously much rather it make the 
trip in someone's trunk than pay the gorillas at the various shipping 
services to drop test  it several times.


We will have the unit delivered to your house and we will meet you on 
this end preferably in the Tampa/Orlando area but other spots in Florida 
are workable. beggars cant be too choosy. We will gladly pay your gas 
bill as a return for the favor


I suppose anyone driving round trip from Tampa/Orlando to DFW for the 
holidays would also work, bringing the amp back on your return?


Contact me OFF LIST PLEASE

Dave
NR1DX
nr...@arrl.net
manu...@artekmanuals.com



--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: H40TT on 160m

[Artek Manuals]

Nothing here in Florida ...not even a hint. Nothing else heard from the 
Pacific in general could be condx

�What are they using for an antenna?

Dave
NR1DX

On 11/25/2019 2:13 AM, Gary Smith wrote:

Hi John,

Listening with 3 different Rx antennas in
CT & no cigar at this QTH.

Not the first time, but I usually hear
something. Tough Condx I think.

Cheers & 73,

Gary
KA1J


GM all. At the moment the plan is H40TT Rob will be on 160m around his
sunset 0700z (EU Monday morning). If condx are no good he will switch
to 80m and the same again Tuesday morning. Then they will pack up in
the hope of flying on Thursday. Good luck 73 John G3XHZ

Sent from my iPhone
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
Reflector




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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Saturday night

[Artek Manuals]

Dave et all

Friday night was better to be sure than  Saturday night. Here in the 
deep south we got no sunset or sunrise bump. In fact early in the 
evening there were almost no EU to be heard, a few Caribs which were 
quickly worked through. I gave up around 0200 and set an alarm for 0500. 
Things had picked considerably.


Then this morning there as you noted there was almost no pacific opening 
at all , one KH6 and not that strong, No JA's which were loud earlier in 
the week.


Friday by comparison EU was loud well above average with many stations 
registering an honest S5 to S8 on the BOG ! In all I worked a total of 
46 countries on both nights (40 of those on Friday/Night Saturday 
Morn..A personal best) .  Funny you should mention QSB there was almost 
none noted here. The only one I missed that I really wanted was 6V7A, 
just didn't have the patience for the rude crowd calling on top of each 
other (please dont hijack this thread to play aint it awful with me... 
we cant solve that problem here) . The personal best catch for me was 
OY9JD for an ATNO . I was surprised and disappointed that 5N7Q or the 
energizer bunny 5T5PA was not in fray at all  on any band?


Dave
NR1DX
Florida


On 11/24/2019 1:46 PM, David Olean wrote:

Hi Top Banders

I was dabbling in the CQ WW contest last night (Nov 24 UT) and noted a 
few things that seemed quite different to me here in NE USA. The 
normal situation at my sunset occurred. I could hear many many EU 
stations but almost none of them could hear me. I am used to that. I 
quit and had dinner and spent some quality time with the XYL for the 
evening. At about 0300 UT I was QRV again.  A storm was blowing 
through New England and There was a fair amount of lightning static, 
but I was able to call many stations who were very good copy, but 
almost always got the impression that I was barely audible with them. 
I am running 1300-1400 watts output. Most stations took three or four 
calls to get my call correct. A few gave up and had my call wrong but 
went on to other callers. Other loud stations CQed in my face. This 
was very different from many of my past experiences. I actually went 
and checked the electrical passband of my TX antenna to make sure it 
was performing normally. (It was) I also kept looking at the wattmeter 
to make sure that I was transmitting into the antenna!


I did note that there was deep and rapid QSB over a 30 second period. 
I am wondering what the hearing conditions were in Europe Saturday 
night on 1.8 MHz. I suspect that noise was a big problem.


Around 1000 UT until my sunrise arpund 1200, I did a fair amount of 
listening but heard very little in the way of Pacific DX.  I was 
operating un assisted so do not know who was QRV, but tuning across 
the band produced only two HI stations heard from the Pacific. No KL7, 
no islands, and no VK/ZL. A few CQs produced no QSOs for points.  Very 
disappointing morning.


73

Dave K1WHS

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Ohmic resistance question

[Artek Manuals]

As I suspected . thy "digging implement" tis naught but a spade 
. !


Dave
NR1DX

On 11/23/2019 11:42 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 11/23/2019 8:04 PM, GEORGE WALLNER wrote:
I think the question was meant as a joke, as it is called "galvanic 
isolation".


Almost 20 years ago, an international group of engineers that made up 
the Working Group of which I was Vice-Chair went around about 
"galvanic isolation" while writing AES Standards for EMC. The result 
of our discussions was that the term had no real meaning because no 
one could produce a real definition for it in the literature.


Likewise, NR1DX was right to question "Ohmic Isolation."� If we mean 
DC isolation, we should say so. If we mean that there is a two-winding 
transformer to minimize common mode current, we should say that. Too 
many words like "ground" and "balun" have multiple meanings -- they 
are confusing, obscure how things work, and cause people to do the 
wrong things to solve problems.


73, Jim K9YC


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Additional comments on the BevFlex-4X

[Artek Manuals]

Ned

I was with right up until the last statement. What exactly is "ohmic 
isolation" ? I never heard that term before ..could you expand on that


Dave
NR1DX




On 11/23/2019 3:21 PM, Ned Mountain wrote:

- Unified Microsystems has put a lot of effort into improving the
quality and water resistance of the original BevFlex-4 design

-

- The boxes are highly water resistant with rubber gaskets to allow
them to be opened repeatedly without compromising water resistance.

-

- The PCB assemblies are conformal coated to protect against
condensation or other moisture

-

- The use of internal jumpers reduces the number of penetrations of
the box which enhances water resistance

-

- There is lightning protection built into the end termination
units

-

- The BevFlex-4X system has multiple instances of Ohmic isolation
to reduce noise pickup from ground loops


Ned

WC4X



Ned Mountain

ned.mount...@mindspring.com

770 823 4205 (M)


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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Rx Antenna System

[Artek Manuals]

Tony

I have used one of these they do work . I had an opportunity to compare 
it with a more typical end fed bog of the same length in the same 
direction. They are identical in performance . In my situation both 
BOG's were installed over very poor ( essentially well drained dry sand).


Pro's
1) easy to install
2) Works as good any "standard BOG" would at your location , when 
installed in a similar manor as you would any other BOG ( no better, no 
worse, no magic)

3) Easy bidirectional switching
4) Built in receiver protection against high RF levels ( back to back 
diodes)

5) Built in� lightening protection
6) Fused protection to keep you from frying the unit if you transmit into it
7) Allows you to experiment with other receiving antennas� such as 
Flags, Pennants and standard beverages as well as bogs all from the same 
box ( depending on the configuration you must open the end reflection 
boxes and move jumpers) As shipped comes default for BOGS and Beverages
8) The feed point can indeed be inserted at ANY point along the antenna 
without affecting the performance


Cons
1) Very expensive for what it is, sells for at least 2X what the bill of 
material suggests it should ($75-$150 is more realistic price,� IMO)
2) While it comes with stainless hardware, some of it is cheap Chinese 
cr#$, Some pieces on mine began showing rust after less than 60 days in 
Florida's monsoon climate, Plan of having to replace that at some point
3) IMO the boxes will not remain water tight with repeated closing and 
opening to move jumpers etc, based on similar experience with this style 
box that I have purchased for other DIY projects. Once you are through 
playing, plan on taking more diligent sealing steps once a permanent 
installation is decided on
4) The fuse noted in #6 above is an odd package� ( to me anyway) low 
current 50ma job in a solder in package. I think I would choose a more 
typical cylindrical clip in holder, there is certainly room in the box.
5) The 2way box in the shack is too light ( needs a couple of pounds to 
hold it down)



Interesting Info, Hints & Kinks

1) No BOG will work as well� when placed too close to a wire ( chain 
link) fence. allow at least 5' set back
2) The basic center fed RG-6 design is right out of Misek, W1WCR's 
Beverage Antenna Handbook , 2nd Edition, Page 68
3) Mostly easy to reverse engineer once you have a set in your hands, 
not surprisingly they will not supply schematics.
4) The "magic" is in the end "Reflection " Boxes which have selectable 
(via the jumper settings)� impedance ratios depending on the antenna 
type (BOG, Beverage, Flag, etc) to be used with.
5) Yes I have reverse engineered the the thing ( I pad $$$ for the 
ability to do so) and NO I will not share the results directly with you 
. I will point out that If you don't need the flexibility of using the 
same set of boxes for many different types of receiving antennas then 
build a set with reflection boxes for that specific geometry and you 
don't need the more complex� jumper selectable box. Again I refer you to 
Misek's book for starters.
6) My set is currently on loan to a friend who is trying it out at his 
location . IF he decides not to buy it from me it will be available at a 
discount from the new price. Dont email me I will let you know if I sell 
other than to my friend.


Cu you all in the pile up

Dave
NR1DX

On 11/22/2019 10:12 AM, tony.kaz--- via Topband wrote:

https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/technicalarticles/ums-bevflex
-4x.pdf


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Topband: 60' High T with Elevated radials

[Artek Manuals]

John

touche !...for clarification,  65' high ( at top), Supported by 70' tall 
hickory trees. Radials are 90' long (5' off the ground) 8^). lot is 
200x270 ( just shy of 1.25 acres)


With non resonant, elevated radials, Common mode currents are a big 
deal. And the choke ended up with 4 turns of coax through 8 FT31-240 
cores, Fewer Cores got too hot to touch at 1KW, The measured choking 
impedance of this is about 7K ohms


Plays well though, even with my Florida handicap I have worked 79 
countries  since getting back on top band in March of this year (1/2 of 
those on CW and 1/2  FT8)



Dave
NR1DX

On 11/12/2019 1:47 PM, John Zantek wrote:

To fill in the scenario for the curious, I was running about 800 watts to a 60' 
T wire vertical, with three 90' above ground radials. And a 200' BOG to the NE 
on receive. Modes used were both CW and FT8

The RADIALS are 90ft above ground?  That means the T is 150ft up?  Wow!  Two 
monster towers?  How much land do you have?

A newbie to TB here.  I'm putting up a T, too, but the radials will only be up 
10ft, and I'm depending on my 75ft evergreens to support the T, which is 80ft 
across.

73 John W7CD




--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: 160m Conditions Last Night

[Artek Manuals]

Here in the deep south we generally don't get the kind of 160M openings 
to EU that you enjoy up north, the price we pay for not freezing to 
death when the lights go out and being able to work on our antennas year 
round, I lived in NH and MN� for 15 years before moving back to FL so I 
know first hand the joy of shoveling snow and being able to work EU when 
your 1000 miles closer to them than we are down south. Down here we are 
lucky� hear 3 or 4 EU stations on a good night regardless of the mode.


Then last night something extraordinary ( the night after Doug's report) 
. I went out to the shack @0200Z� to turn things off before going to bed 
. There was HA7TM calling CQ and the computer reminded me that while I 
had worked him on many bands but that I needed him on 160M to fill out 
my dance card. A few minutes later he was in the log and no other� EU 
stations were copied (YAWN)� .. then as I reached for the big switch I 
was called by R6YY. What happened next I suspect is what if sometimes 
referred to as� "pipeline propagation" . Stations from NW Russia lined 
up and started calling me sometimes 3 stations deep. When the dust 
settled I had worked 15 Russians, 2- SM's, an OH and a SP, all in the 
span of about 30 minutes. You would think my call sign was VP6R . During 
this mini pile up NO OTHER EU stations were heard. No DL's, no F's, no 
G's no I's . just UA's . One of the 3rd most memorable nights in my 
TOP-Band life-time spanning nearly 50 years


To fill in the scenario for the curious, I was running about 800 watts 
to a 60' T wire vertical, with three 90' above ground radials. And a 
200' BOG to the NE on receive. Modes used were both CW and FT8


Dave NR1DX
dit dit

On 11/11/2019 12:37 PM, Doug Renwick wrote:
Very good over the pole real ham radio (cw) conditions from Northern 
Europe

last night in west NA. Some stations had amazing signals; a few of the
strongest were LY7M, YL2SM and LA1MFA.

Doug

Canada; the ship of fools where corruption and politics are synonymous

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Grounds

[Artek Manuals]

And NEITHER of those have thing to do with a RF Ground at a specific 
frequency  


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/18/2019 11:36 AM, Roger D Johnson wrote:
I wish there some sort of inoculation that hams could get that would 
allow
them to discern the difference between a power line safety ground 
(required
by code) and a lightning ground that is designed to dissipate large 
amounts
of energy due to a lightning strike. The ham reflectors are full of 
accounts
of putting in X number of ground rods, measuring the resistance at 
power line
frequencies and being fooled into thinking they have a good lightning 
ground.


73, Roger
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Beverage Length vs F/B or (RDF?)

[Artek Manuals]

Jim

When you say it measured 70K was that DC, low frequency (60hz) A/C or at 
1.8/3.5 Mhz RF?


Big difference.
'
Here two 5' rods about 2' apart measure about 2K DC but measure about 
600 ohms at 1.8 Mhz...Still not sure how that correlates to a larger 
earth RF ground. The other thing is RF ground varies not only with the 
soil type but frequency


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/18/2019 10:51 AM, MU 4CX250B wrote:

Thanks for the suggestion, Dave. I’m using DXE hardware and relay
boxes for switching,  and twin lengths of WD-1A mil surplus telephone
cable for the wires. The lengths are spaced roughly 6 inches apart to
approximate 450 ohms. The end terminations are three 8ft ground rods
spaced out about 4 ft apart (12 ft total).The soil is soft, silty, and
relatively alkaline, but not as sandy as yours seems to be.

I did try to measure the ground resistance once. My 160/80m
transmitting vertical (70 ft self-supporting aluminum mast,
base-loaded with a switchable vacuum relay) is about 800 ft from my
shack and fed with hardline. The end-to-end resistance of the hardline
shield is only an ohm or two. The vertical has sixty 120ft radials
strewn out across the soil, and an 8 ft ground rod at the base. In my
test, I disconnected the hardline from the vertical, but left it
connected at station end, where it was well-grounded.  I measured the
resistance between the ground rod at the base of the antenna and the
disconnected hardline shield, and it was about 70K ohms.  With 800 ft
separation, the soil resistance approximates a two-dimensional
conductor and is independent of the spacing between the measurement
points. Thus the 70K resistance is an approximation of the actual soil
resistivity. I wish I could compare that value with measurements on
other soil types.
73,
Jim w8zr

Sent from my iPhone


On Oct 18, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Artek Manuals  wrote:

Jim

Poor front to back can indeed be a result of being too long. Although w8JI 
would argue that at 700 feet your just about at optimum (1.5 wavelengths)  I 
would think it would be easy to add an insulator /jumper and a set of 
terminations and  grounds at ~500 feet and see what the difference is.

What kind of grounds do you have at the ends? Living on a granular quartz plane 
myself with very poor ground conductivity ( I can push a 5ft length of  1/2" 
copper pipe 3ft in the ground by hand (pure sand!)  and easily tap it in the last 
two feet with a hammer)  I would think that the grounds at the end would indeed have 
an effect on front to back or RDF which is the latest popular figure of merit ( how 
do you actually MESAURE RDF?).

I often wonder how one knows when one has a "good enough ground". I have read 
https://www.w8ji.com/beverages.htm many times. Tom suggest a proxy method using temporary 
radials which I don't have the topography to install in a meaningful way.  The net result 
is I take Tom's measurements with a grain of salt since they are done on soil with much 
better conductivity than you (apparently ) or I have

Dave
NR1DX


On 10/18/2019 8:51 AM, MU 4CX250B wrote:
On this general subject, I’m using bi-diectional beverages 720 ft
long, suspended 7 ft above sandy desert ground. The F/B ratio is poor
(not important for New Mexico) but I’m wondering if the antennas are
too long? I use them on 80m/160m.
73,
Jim w8zr

Sent from my iPhone


On Oct 17, 2019, at 9:31 PM, Artek Manuals  wrote:

Tim

Which antenna will you be using ; BOG, Beverage or a FLAG/Pennant

I have been doing some experimenting with the BF-4X with BOGs and Beverages in 
both very poor sandy soil and then again at a water front (salt) canal 
location. Eventually I will get around to trying out a FLAG/Pennant style as 
well. Seems to work pretty well in my dry sandy location� the performance has 
been less than stellar so far next to the saltwater canal, I think this may 
have more to do with the seawall near by. This is a BOG issue and not any 
problem with the BF-4X boxes. with BOGS i tried it in an end fed and center� 
fed configuration� and an of center feed with a beverage.

The for BF-4X literature says BOGs from 100 to 300' . For my poor soil conditions 
I find that 200' ( as many other s have reported for BOGs) is the upper limit> 
performance was noticeably poorer at 225', 250' and 350' . This is a function of 
soil conditions and not the boxes and YMMV.

Dave
NR1Dx


On 10/16/2019 11:35 AM, Tim Duffy wrote:
Thinking about the Fall Stew coming up this Saturday, I will be trying out
the BevFlex-4X that W9XT is now manufacturing.


Here is the flyer:

<https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/technicalarticles/ums-bevfle
x-4x.pdf>
https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/technicalarticles/ums-bevflex
-4x.pdf


And the BevFlex-4X details:

<https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/ums-bevflex-4x>
https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/ums-bevflex-4x


73

Tim K3LR



_
Searchabl

Topband: Beverage Length vs F/B or (RDF?)

[Artek Manuals]

Jim

Poor front to back can indeed be a result of being too long. Although 
w8JI would argue that at 700 feet your just about at optimum (1.5 
wavelengths)  I would think it would be easy to add an insulator /jumper 
and a set of terminations and  grounds at ~500 feet and see what the 
difference is.


What kind of grounds do you have at the ends? Living on a granular 
quartz plane myself with very poor ground conductivity ( I can push a 
5ft length of  1/2" copper pipe 3ft in the ground by hand (pure sand!)  
and easily tap it in the last two feet with a hammer)  I would think 
that the grounds at the end would indeed have an effect on front to back 
or RDF which is the latest popular figure of merit ( how do you actually 
MESAURE RDF?).


I often wonder how one knows when one has a "good enough ground". I have 
read https://www.w8ji.com/beverages.htm many times. Tom suggest a proxy 
method using temporary radials which I don't have the topography to 
install in a meaningful way.  The net result is I take Tom's 
measurements with a grain of salt since they are done on soil with much 
better conductivity than you (apparently ) or I have


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/18/2019 8:51 AM, MU 4CX250B wrote:

On this general subject, I’m using bi-diectional beverages 720 ft
long, suspended 7 ft above sandy desert ground. The F/B ratio is poor
(not important for New Mexico) but I’m wondering if the antennas are
too long? I use them on 80m/160m.
73,
Jim w8zr

Sent from my iPhone


On Oct 17, 2019, at 9:31 PM, Artek Manuals  wrote:

Tim

Which antenna will you be using ; BOG, Beverage or a FLAG/Pennant

I have been doing some experimenting with the BF-4X with BOGs and Beverages in 
both very poor sandy soil and then again at a water front (salt) canal 
location. Eventually I will get around to trying out a FLAG/Pennant style as 
well. Seems to work pretty well in my dry sandy location� the performance has 
been less than stellar so far next to the saltwater canal, I think this may 
have more to do with the seawall near by. This is a BOG issue and not any 
problem with the BF-4X boxes. with BOGS i tried it in an end fed and center� 
fed configuration� and an of center feed with a beverage.

The for BF-4X literature says BOGs from 100 to 300' . For my poor soil conditions 
I find that 200' ( as many other s have reported for BOGs) is the upper limit> 
performance was noticeably poorer at 225', 250' and 350' . This is a function of 
soil conditions and not the boxes and YMMV.

Dave
NR1Dx


On 10/16/2019 11:35 AM, Tim Duffy wrote:
Thinking about the Fall Stew coming up this Saturday, I will be trying out
the BevFlex-4X that W9XT is now manufacturing.


Here is the flyer:

<https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/technicalarticles/ums-bevfle
x-4x.pdf>
https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/technicalarticles/ums-bevflex
-4x.pdf


And the BevFlex-4X details:

<https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/ums-bevflex-4x>
https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/ums-bevflex-4x


73

Tim K3LR



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

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: BevFlex-4X - RX antenna

[Artek Manuals]

Tim

Which antenna will you be using ; BOG, Beverage or a FLAG/Pennant

I have been doing some experimenting with the BF-4X with BOGs and 
Beverages in both very poor sandy soil and then again at a water front 
(salt) canal location. Eventually I will get around to trying out a 
FLAG/Pennant style as well. Seems to work pretty well in my dry sandy 
location� the performance has been less than stellar so far next to the 
saltwater canal, I think this may have more to do with the seawall near 
by. This is a BOG issue and not any problem with the BF-4X boxes. with 
BOGS i tried it in an end fed and center� fed configuration� and an of 
center feed with a beverage.


The for BF-4X literature says BOGs from 100 to 300' . For my poor soil 
conditions I find that 200' ( as many other s have reported for BOGs) is 
the upper limit> performance was noticeably poorer at 225', 250' and 
350' . This is a function of soil conditions and not the boxes and YMMV.


Dave
NR1Dx

On 10/16/2019 11:35 AM, Tim Duffy wrote:

Thinking about the Fall Stew coming up this Saturday, I will be trying out
the BevFlex-4X that W9XT is now manufacturing.


Here is the flyer:


https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/technicalarticles/ums-bevflex
-4x.pdf


And the BevFlex-4X details:


https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/ums-bevflex-4x


73

Tim K3LR



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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Remote operation

[Artek Manuals]

Neither

What is killing amateur radio is that for most young people it is not 
relevant. When you can chat face to face anywhere in the world with a PC 
and cell phone they ( understandably) don't see the attraction or 
experience the thrill of hanging up a wire and waiting for 
sunset/sunrise for that 10 min opening to send a few snippets of text 
via Morse code through the noise with� someone on the other side of the 
planet. Many aspects of amateur radio have become curious anachronism's 
like sewing your own clothes and making you own butter. We are killing 
amateur not with FT8 but with our own worn out genes because those of us 
who practice "the old ways" are dying and soon we will be dying at a 
faster rate than younger players will coming to experience the ritual of 
Wouf hong (sp?)


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/13/2019 2:15 PM, w...@w5zn.org wrote:
OK I'm confused..was it remotes or FT8 that killed amateur radio?? 
Or maybe the 50 other chicken little proclamations that did?


I need professional help to sort this all out (that's a given, so 
please don't comment on that condition!)


73 Joel W5ZN
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: PreStew coming next weekend

[Artek Manuals]

Ohhh can I get a copy of the log checking software?


I like to know how I am doing as the test goes on


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/13/2019 2:04 PM, Tree wrote:
I don't know about N1MM.  However, there is no need for your logging 
program to do it.  The log checking software calculate the points for 
everyone.


Tree

On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 10:56 AM Artek Manuals 
mailto:manu...@artekmanuals.com>> wrote:


Hi Tree

Thanks for the reminder actually I had better VK/ZK openings this
summer on the EAST coast than I have for the last month 8^).
Europe and
Africa are definitely better though 8^)

Does N1MM do the distance/score calculation for the SP? Must since
the
exchange is the grid square I assume it uses that to do the
calculation?

Looking forward to giving my new BOGs and one E/W Beverage a work
out !

Dave
NR1DX





On 10/13/2019 12:12 PM, Tree wrote:
> The popular PreStew event is coming on Oct 19/20th next weekend
starting at
> 1500Z and running for 24 hours.
>
> The band has been improving with good signals from Europe into
West coats
> of North America and daily openings from VK to North America and
Europe.
>
> Full rules and previous results available at http://www.kkn.net/stew
>
> Tree N6TR
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband -
Topband Reflector

-- 
Dave

manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com <http://www.ArtekManuals.com>


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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



--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: PreStew coming next weekend

[Artek Manuals]

Hi Tree

Thanks for the reminder actually I had better VK/ZK openings this 
summer on the EAST coast than I have for the last month 8^). Europe and 
Africa are definitely better though 8^)


Does N1MM do the distance/score calculation for the SP? Must since the 
exchange is the grid square I assume it uses that to do the calculation?


Looking forward to giving my new BOGs and one E/W Beverage a work out !

Dave
NR1DX





On 10/13/2019 12:12 PM, Tree wrote:

The popular PreStew event is coming on Oct 19/20th next weekend starting at
1500Z and running for 24 hours.

The band has been improving with good signals from Europe into West coats
of North America and daily openings from VK to North America and Europe.

Full rules and previous results available at http://www.kkn.net/stew

Tree N6TR
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: Ground return wire under a Beverage

[Artek Manuals]

I have been experimenting a lot with BOGs in the last couple of months. 
And now thanks to a very amiable neighbor will be moving into building 
some more traditional elevated Beverages in the 450 to 500 foot range


My bogs and the beverages are /will be constructed using RG6 as the 
antenna itself and will be reversible. In reading Misek/ W1WCR Beverage 
Antenna Handbook. He often uses a ground return wire tying the ground 
rods together at each end ( except for  BOGs) with an insulated wire on 
top of the ground. Reading ON4UN Low Band DX ing I did not see any 
Beverages with the ground return wire ! ?!


So here is the question has any one done it both ways and what is the 
net affect (if any) with and without the ground return wire under the 
same Beverage.


Dave
NR1DX
manu...@artekmanuals.com

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Looking for antenna suggestions

[Artek Manuals]

Fred

1) You will be (pleasantly) surprised at how well a 300' beverage 
actually works on 160 ( and will work great on 80 & 40)


2) At 200' BOGs actually do well. I just finished a series of 
experiments with some BOGs and have worked several new ones that we 
could not copy on the Xmit antenna. The "optimum" length on a BOG 
actually laying on the ground is on the the order of 180-200' . For my 
very well drained sandy soils 250' and 350 feet were poorer performers, 
poor F/B and noise rejection


3) Your bent Beverage will work but will develop a "wart" off to one 
side of the pattern at an angle to the back . The front lobe will still 
be pretty clean


4) I have never used a FLAG/ Pennant style antenna, but my friends who 
have say if you have room for the bev you will find the BEV to be a much 
better antenna. I do well N. NE, E, S, SW and W. with my BOGs.  I am 
space limited in the NW/SE direction so may yet try a FLAG / Penanat for 
that heading


Dave



On 10/12/2019 9:06 AM, fmoeves wrote:

Working on antennas like everyone else.I have 1 585 ft Beverage up and a K9AY 
loop.I have a spot on a slope back in the woods about 200 to 300 ft long. It's 
on the edge of the field it's NE/SW.Thinking about a EWE antenna or some sort 
of fixed flag.Looking something to fit and a fun project. One question about 
Beverage. I can get close to 300 ft straight. If I bend it south I can then 
probably get to 500 ft. The angle would be maybe 20 to 30 degrees.How would 
this effect the antenna performance? Thanks Fred KB4QZH
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: ZK3A

[Artek Manuals]

Shelby

Not all their computers logs as of the online time stamp get fed into 
the online database.  Sometimes it takes another 12 to 24 hours for a 
particular stations logs (As I recall there are at least 3 stations on 
the air at all-times) to get uploaded. The reported time stamp is a bit 
misleading.


If you feel really good about your QSO it will likely show up later 
tonight, if you had a "iffy" qso they have as much as said make an 
insurance contact tomorrow


Dave
NR1DX

On 10/8/2019 2:39 PM, Brian Campbell wrote:

Hi Shelby,

The exact same thing happened to me. However on a later update both the 160 CW 
and FT8 QSOs were in the log.

73,
Brian
VE3MGY


From: Topband  on behalf of ShelbyK4WW 

Sent: October 8, 2019 2:21:52 PM
To: Topband Reflector 
Subject: Topband: ZK3A

Anyone else work ZK3A today about 0610Z, and the contact not appearing in
their online log search? Online log search indicates last QSO is database:
08/10/2019 1103Z
Thanks

73, Shelby - K4WW
As I don't have an iPad nor iPhone, sent from my PC
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Furnace RFI

[Artek Manuals]

Mark, Bill et all
If you Google "Furnace Fan RFI" you will find a host of information on 
how to cure rfi from variable speed AC ( & HEATING) blower fans. Turns 
out that the fans in fact meet the FCC specs but at the level we operate 
at they can wipe out the 500hz segments every 18-25khz. The 
manufacturer  of the fans which are used by 75% of Central A/C guys 
actually has a RFI kit that can be purchased and installed ONLY BY A 
LICENSED A/C Contractor. If it were me I would dicker with whoever you 
buy your unit from that it must have this fan RFI kit installed in 
advance or they don't get the business. The details are in several of 
the google articles.



Dave
NR1DX

On 10/3/2019 6:46 PM, Bill Stewart wrote:

Mark, we have a York gas pack (a/c and propane heat)(abt 4 yrs old).
When in the a/c mode and the outside exhaust fan comes on, I hear a spurious 
signal
every 25kc or so from lf thru six meters. There may be a way to fix it...
some kind of filtering maybe, but I don't want to mess with it. GL on
finding something quiet73 de Bill K4JYS
PS...one helpful thing is to keep the t-stat up high so it won't run as much.
Saves on the electric bill too.hi.

- Original Message -
From: "lmlangenfeld" 
To: "topband" 
Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2019 5:22:31 PM
Subject: Topband: Furnace RFI

We are in the market for a new high-efficiency furnace, and I note that many 
(if not most) of the current models use variable-speed DC blower motors.  I am 
concerned about the potential for RFI from the speed controllers, and wonder if 
any list members have any recommendations or recent experience (good or bad) 
with such units.Tnx es 73,Mark -- WA9ETWSent from my U.S. Cellular® Smartphone
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Coax for Top-band beverage antenna

[Artek Manuals]

Kevin et all
(follow up to a post earlier this week)

I am in the process of building some RG6 BOG's ( where the "antenna" and 
the feed line are both RG6)  and happen have a brand new 500' role of 
Southwire RG6 type CM/CL . 18ga copper clad steel center conductor 100% 
Aluminum foil/60% aluminum braid


I measured the loss with a 75ohm load and 33ohm load (~2:1vswr) with the 
following results


75 ohm load 4.5db (.9db/100 feet)
33 ohm load 8db loss (1.6db/100 feet)

This is about as cheap as it gets at $40/500ft or $.08/foot. This was 
purchased at my local big box builder supply


Equipment used : HP E4433B generator and Boonton 92A RF Voltmeter

Dave
NR1DX


PS: so far the Bogs are working quite well but still tweaking, full 
report when I am done
PPS: if you want loss numbers for other frequencies (80 & 40) drop me a 
private email


On 9/19/2019 3:15 PM, Kevin Shea wrote:

Dave,

The run to the feedpoint of the beverage is about 600'  The beverage 
antenna itself will be coax and that will be about 800'.


Kevin, N9JKP


On Thursday 19 September 2019, 10:25:04 CDT, Artek Manuals 
 wrote:



Kevin

How long a run we talking here?

Dave
NR1DX

On 9/19/2019 11:17 AM, Kevin Shea via Topband wrote:
> I have read that the skin effect at 2 MHz may be deeper than the 
copper coating on a copper covered steel inner conductor of most RG6 
cables.  Thus, as I plan for long cable runs back from my (to be 
installed) Beverages I am thinking I need either solid copper, solid 
aluminum,. or copper covered aluminum for my RG6 coax. So the question 
is am I wrong in this understanding?
> Also, does the shield matter?  It's not very thick so does a foil 
and 60% aluminum shield do the job?  Or should I be looking at a foil 
and 95 percent copper shield like the Belden 1694.
> I know it may not be too material but I want to make an informed 
decision.

> Thanks! and
> 73,
> Kevin, N9JKP

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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com <mailto:manu...@artekmanuals.com>
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com

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

Re: Topband: Coax for Top-band beverage antenna

[Artek Manuals]

Kevin

How long a run we talking here?

Dave
NR1DX

On 9/19/2019 11:17 AM, Kevin Shea via Topband wrote:

I have read that the skin effect at 2 MHz may be deeper than the copper coating 
on a copper covered steel inner conductor of most RG6 cables.� Thus, as I plan 
for long cable runs back from my (to be installed) Beverages I am thinking I 
need either solid copper, solid aluminum,. or copper covered aluminum for my 
RG6 coax.� So the question is am I wrong in this understanding?
Also, does the shield matter?� It's not very thick so does a foil and 60% 
aluminum shield do the job?� Or should I be looking at a foil and 95 percent 
copper shield like the Belden 1694.
I know it may not be too material but I want to make an informed decision.
Thanks! and
73,
Kevin, N9JKP
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Relationship Between Ground Wave and Low-Angle Radiation

[Artek Manuals]

Pete

Interesting idea to be sure...Regardless of the "theoretical" answer. I 
would suggest you take daily readings (probably between 11AM and 1PM) 
for a month and log those before starting to add radials. If day in and 
day out you get variation of more than a few tenth's of a db the W3LPL 
RBN is not likely a good choice� for this project.


How many radials do you have now and� how many are you prepared to add? 
AS you get more and more radials the incremental effect of going from 4 
to 8 will be much more noticeable than going from 24 to 28


Dave
NR1DX





On 9/13/2019 9:31 AM, N4ZR wrote:
I don't think I've ever read anything on this topic.� Basically, what 
I'm asking is, could ground wave to a fairly nearby Skimmer be used as 
an analogue to low-angle radiation to assess the effectiveness of 
radial systems on an inverted L?� W3LPL is about 30 miles from me and 
has a very capable Skimmer Server-based RBN node.




--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: BOG questions

[Artek Manuals]

Lloyd et all

Isn't a BOG say 3" or 6" high draped over the weeds really now a very 
low beverage and not a BOG at all?


It now needs to be longer and terminated to ground on the far end like 
you would a beverage in order to be effective?


Wish the NEC4 engine wasn't so expensive I am getting the itch to spend 
all night modeling these permutations and combinations


There are two advantages to a BOG as I see it . It is technically very 
easy to install if you can expose bare dirt to lay it on and it is 
shorter than by almost half� for useful F/B.


Dave
NR1DX
manu...@artekmanuals.com



On 8/25/2019 4:15 PM, Lloyd - N9LB wrote:

Hello Mark!

I did a similar thing a couple of years ago in order to run a BOG 
across the

abandoned farm behind my property. Never doing that again!

The following season I set the mower deck to maximum height on my lawn and
garden tractor and drove thru the same field of six foot high weeds and
thorns ( and assorted ticks ). That worked a lot better ( and much safer
too ).

What I learned was that the BOG works well when laying directly on the
ground, but was worthless when draped over weeds.

GL es 73

Lloyd - N9LB


-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Lunday
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2019 2:48 PM
To: Mikek ; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: BOG questions

OK, my wife now is convinced that I have a screw loose in the brain
somewhere (she had plenty of evidence before but decided to give me the
benefit of the doubt until today)I just spent an hour in the hot North
Carolina sun, wearing jeans and a heavy winter jacket so that I could wade
through 300 feet of neck-high thorns and nettles and tamp those down so I
could re-lay the insulated BOG wire.

I do this for three reasons:

1. I want to confirm the theory that growing grass/weeds around the 
original

installation 11 moths ago have compromised performance

2. A nearby lightning strike Friday night wiped out something in my HiZ
4-square receiving array, and I refuse to use the 160 meter inverted L for
receive, even though this is a quiet QTH.

3. Even at my age of 55, I find sudden surges of energy when involved with
such projects.

I shall share my observations as the nights progress, while I
investigate/diagnose/repair/replace the damaged parts on the HiZ array.

Mark Lunday, WD4ELG
Greensboro, NC FM06be
wd4...@arrl.net
http://wd4elg.blogspot.com
SKCC #16439 FISTS #17972 QRP ARCI #16497 _ Searchable
Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

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




--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: Modeling close to earth ( was Odd-ball question)

[Artek Manuals]

Not enough coffee earlier a better description of the radials: three 
90ft radials radials  7'ft high spaced in 120 degree increments  (0, 
120and 240 degrees)


Another interesting side notes discovered while doing the modeling
1) A three radial version in a 180 degree half circle (0, 90 and 180) or 
what I like to call the "up against the fence", resulted in very much 
the same modeled impedance and only slight pattern distortion ( less 
than 1db) , Predicted radiated field strength  by adding the forth 
radial at 270 degrees only resulted in an increase in signal in that 
direction a few tenths of a dB


2) Inverted L's   pattern distortion can be non trivial depending on the 
length of the top section. The signal decreases in the direction the top 
section "points". In the past I had a preference for having very long 
top sections ( Total length: vertical + horizontal on the order of 
150')  so as to increase the real portion of feed point impedance to 
50ohms and then tune out the increased reactive portion with a series 
cap. Depending on how long the top section is signals in the direction 
of the pointing top of the L can be down by as much as 3 to 6dB !!. At 
the new QTH the best tree supports resulted in a 6db pattern decrease 
directly pointed a Europe 8^(... Which is why I ended up with a "T" 
instead of an "L".)


Dave
NR1DX

On 8/25/2019 8:25 AM, Artek Manuals wrote:

Jerry et all

My personal antenna FOR 160 was/is as follows

160M T:
  60' Tall with with a 78' flattop. The "bottom"  is at 7' ( so the 
actual vertical element is 53') with three 90' radials at 7' spaced 
pretty nearly in 60 degree increments ( 60, 120, 240). There is a 
tapped inductor in series with the ground side (NOT the vertical side) 
of the feed point used to resonate the whole thing . For the general 
approach to loading and using non-resonant radials I was strongly 
influenced by K5IU's work in Spring 1997 Communications Quarterly  
(google should  find you reprints of that) . The vertical is #14 bare 
stranded copper and the radials are #10 Bare solid copper ( no magic 
on sizes etc just what I happened to have on hand.  Ezenec  says this 
should be around 13 ohms at 1840 resonance ( with a 23uh series 
inductor) . In practice it is closer to 25ohms at resonance  with a 
about 17uh of inductance.


It is then matched with a 2:1 UNUN to 50 ohms. This antenna REALLY 
NEEDS and uses a common mode choke at the feed point . This turned out 
to 10 to be ten FT-240-43 torroid's with 4 turns of coax through the 
batch, lesser amounts of ferrite became quite hot.


After the smoke clears it all appears to work very well I have worked 
24 countries on 5 continents ( still need Antarctica and Asia...tough 
on any band from FL) in just 4 SUMMER months and I am sure that total 
will climb quickly once the winter season starts. For the FT8 doom and 
gloomers half of these were on CW8^)


Happy to share details of the 80 and 40 M antennas off list, not 
relevant  to the topband list !


Dave
NR1Dx
manu...@artekmanuals.com




On 8/25/2019 1:33 AM, K4SAV wrote:

Dave

Just a clarification.  I didn't want your actual data.  All I wanted 
was the length of the wires and the frequency.


Jerry

On 8/24/2019 9:30 PM, K4SAV wrote:

Hey Dave

I'm interested in your data.  How long were the radials and what 
frequency were you using for the measurements.


I suspect that NEC2 may be close enough to be generally useful 
(accuracy is questionable) for a BOG up to 250 ft on 160.  My 
measurements (several of them) say that NEC isn't close for a 350 ft 
BOG.  Usually my BOGs are 1 to 2 inches above the dirt because they 
sit on dead grass.


I seriously doubt that NEC4 will be accurate for a 350 ft BOG 
either.  I have seen a 450 ft BOG pattern generated by NEC4 and I 
can duplicate it with NEC2, (with only minor insignificant squiggle 
differences) and I know that NEC2 is wrong.


I suspect that as frequency decreases or the wire becomes shorter, 
NEC answers will improve.


A data point from someone else would be nice to know.

Jerry, K4SAV


On 8/24/2019 7:53 PM, Artek Manuals wrote:

Chuck et all

It is well documented that the the NEC-2 based programs leave 
something to be desired� with wires on or very near the ground, 
This includes most of the EZENEC� family and MMANA-G� Purportedly 
NEC-4 ( there is a Ezenec version which runs with NEC 4 engine ... 
not a cheap date) does deal with the near earth problem .


How close is "Close" is a matter of conjecture. A friend of mine 
and I have been working on building and modeling vertical antennas 
( Verticals, Inv-L and T's) for 160/80/40 with ELEVATED 
NON-RESONANT radials at 3' and 6' (google "K5IU Elevated Radials") 
. The good news is at 3' and above both NEC 2 and NEC 4 models 
agree within 5% or better.� We have not done 

Re: Topband: Modeling close to earth ( was Odd-ball question)

[Artek Manuals]

Jerry et all

My personal antenna FOR 160 was/is as follows

160M T:
  60' Tall with with a 78' flattop. The "bottom"  is at 7' ( so the 
actual vertical element is 53') with three 90' radials at 7' spaced 
pretty nearly in 60 degree increments ( 60, 120, 240). There is a tapped 
inductor in series with the ground side (NOT the vertical side) of the 
feed point used to resonate the whole thing . For the general approach 
to loading and using non-resonant radials I was strongly influenced by 
K5IU's work in Spring 1997 Communications Quarterly  (google should  
find you reprints of that) . The vertical is #14 bare stranded copper 
and the radials are #10 Bare solid copper ( no magic on sizes etc just 
what I happened to have on hand.  Ezenec  says this should be around 13 
ohms at 1840 resonance ( with a 23uh series inductor) . In practice it 
is closer to 25ohms at resonance  with a about 17uh of inductance.


It is then matched with a 2:1 UNUN to 50 ohms. This antenna REALLY NEEDS 
and uses a common mode choke at the feed point . This turned out to 10 
to be ten FT-240-43 torroid's with 4 turns of coax through the batch, 
lesser amounts of ferrite became quite hot.


After the smoke clears it all appears to work very well I have worked 24 
countries on 5 continents ( still need Antarctica and Asia...tough on 
any band from FL) in just 4 SUMMER months and I am sure that total will 
climb quickly once the winter season starts. For the FT8 doom and 
gloomers half of these were on CW8^)


Happy to share details of the 80 and 40 M antennas off list, not 
relevant  to the topband list !


Dave
NR1Dx
manu...@artekmanuals.com




On 8/25/2019 1:33 AM, K4SAV wrote:

Dave

Just a clarification.  I didn't want your actual data.  All I wanted 
was the length of the wires and the frequency.


Jerry

On 8/24/2019 9:30 PM, K4SAV wrote:

Hey Dave

I'm interested in your data.  How long were the radials and what 
frequency were you using for the measurements.


I suspect that NEC2 may be close enough to be generally useful 
(accuracy is questionable) for a BOG up to 250 ft on 160.  My 
measurements (several of them) say that NEC isn't close for a 350 ft 
BOG.  Usually my BOGs are 1 to 2 inches above the dirt because they 
sit on dead grass.


I seriously doubt that NEC4 will be accurate for a 350 ft BOG 
either.  I have seen a 450 ft BOG pattern generated by NEC4 and I can 
duplicate it with NEC2, (with only minor insignificant squiggle 
differences) and I know that NEC2 is wrong.


I suspect that as frequency decreases or the wire becomes shorter, 
NEC answers will improve.


A data point from someone else would be nice to know.

Jerry, K4SAV


On 8/24/2019 7:53 PM, Artek Manuals wrote:

Chuck et all

It is well documented that the the NEC-2 based programs leave 
something to be desired� with wires on or very near the ground, This 
includes most of the EZENEC� family and MMANA-G� Purportedly NEC-4 ( 
there is a Ezenec version which runs with NEC 4 engine ... not a 
cheap date) does deal with the near earth problem .


How close is "Close" is a matter of conjecture. A friend of mine and 
I have been working on building and modeling vertical antennas ( 
Verticals, Inv-L and T's) for 160/80/40 with ELEVATED NON-RESONANT 
radials at 3' and 6' (google "K5IU Elevated Radials") . The good 
news is at 3' and above both NEC 2 and NEC 4 models agree within 5% 
or better.� We have not done any comparisons below 3'


Dave
NR1DX


On 8/24/2019 1:41 PM, Chuck Dietz wrote:
I seem to remember someone saying the modelling programs are 
unreliable
when a wire is close to the ground. Also, there is really no way to 
model
the properties of "ground." It can vary in just a few feet and the 
moisture
content varies from day to day. I think this is a "try it" kind of 
antenna.

Read other's reported results.

Chuck W5PR











--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: 160m Season Has Begun Here

[Artek Manuals]

Sig

One of the few things I miss about living in New England (don't miss it 
enough to own a snow shovel again), Is the 160/80 path to EU


My theory is LA/SM/OH and OJ0 all have a really "long" gray line. right now.

What time did you work OJ0O ?� I just finished my "prototype" N/S R-BOG 
today so am looking forward to losing some sleep 8^)


WE too have worked a couple of EU's and the 5T5 in the last week even 
down here in FL,� South America (LU/CE/CX/ YV and PY) are all nightly 
occurrences for the last few weeks


Dave
NR1DX



On 8/24/2019 4:13 PM, k1zm--- via Topband wrote:

Hi There
Two days ago I hooked up the 160m antenna and can report that the 
season is off to a start - at least here it is.
Two pages of Eu stations on CW, 5T5 on FT8 - and OJ0O last night also 
on CW - RST 599 on 1824.
For some reason the LA's and SM's and OH's are the best signals at 
this time of year - dunno why - but all are 599 while other Eu signals 
are down in the 579 region or so.

Time to start looking at 160m at sunset again I guess.
GL to all this season - it should be really good given the current 
state of the solar cycle.

73 JEFF �K1ZM/VY2ZM

Jeff BriggsDXing on the Edge: The Thrill of 160 Meters�Available 
worldwide through�BookBaby,�Array Solutions,�DX Engineering,�Radio 
Society of Great Britain, &�Amazon















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


--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: Modeling close to earth ( was Odd-ball question)

[Artek Manuals]

Chuck et all

It is well documented that the the NEC-2 based programs leave something 
to be desired� with wires on or very near the ground, This includes most 
of the EZENEC� family and MMANA-G� Purportedly NEC-4 ( there is a Ezenec 
version which runs with NEC 4 engine ... not a cheap date) does deal 
with the near earth problem .


How close is "Close" is a matter of conjecture. A friend of mine and I 
have been working on building and modeling vertical antennas ( 
Verticals, Inv-L and T's) for 160/80/40 with ELEVATED NON-RESONANT 
radials at 3' and 6' (google "K5IU Elevated Radials") . The good news is 
at 3' and above both NEC 2 and NEC 4 models agree within 5% or better.� 
We have not done any comparisons below 3'


Dave
NR1DX


On 8/24/2019 1:41 PM, Chuck Dietz wrote:

I seem to remember someone saying the modelling programs are unreliable
when a wire is close to the ground. Also, there is really no way to model
the properties of "ground." It can vary in just a few feet and the 
moisture
content varies from day to day. I think this is a "try it" kind of 
antenna.

Read other's reported results.

Chuck W5PR




--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: BOG questions

[Artek Manuals]

I am in the process of experimenting with an RBOG .. I have seen in 
several places that  BOGS are "self-terminating" and as such have an 
optimum length (on 160M) of something on the order of 200-250 feet. 
Longer BOGs supposedly have degraded directional properties for lengths 
shorter and longer than this.


How important is matching the feed point impedance? I am led to believe 
that this can vary widely  with BOG "installation". Main installation 
Factors being; soil conductivity and ground placement ( in ground, on 
ground. on grass, etc). re there other factors to consider?


How would I go about "measuring" (not modeling !!)  the self terminating 
length for my given conditions. N/S I am limited to 200'  but E/W i can 
go up to 350'.


Finally though technically not a topband question. How "directional is a 
typical 200' BOG on 80 & 40? Or is an 80M BOG ideally 100' long and at 
200' the directional capability is degraded?


Dave
NR1DX
manu...@artekmanuals.com

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: FYI Robot contacts "outlawed" by ARRL

[Artek Manuals]

ALL
Pursuant to the discussion a few weeks ago about robot  contacts ( and 
to some degree robot digi contacts since that mode is most conducive) .


As of the July board meeting the ARRL has officially disallowed robot 
contacts ( in any mode) for contest and DXCC credit. It was not 
mentioned specifically  in the bulletin but I assume the same will apply 
to WAS.


This is just an FYI and NO FURTHER COMMENT IS REQUIRED, DESIRED, OR 
ENCOURAGED!

Dave
NR1DX

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Topband: Wire for 2 wire BOG

[Artek Manuals]

So what is the recommended 2 wires conductor/cable for a 2 wire 
reversible BOG? More specifically what can I get at the big-Box home 
supply? I have heard of folks trying twisted pair doorbell wire, I have 
heard of folks getting old military field wire at the surplus places. i 
really don't have any surplus places close by and I would rather use 
something easily available rather than mail order. Will ZIP cord work? I 
suspect the UV survivability of ZIP cord is not great here in Florida, 
but cheap and easy to replace every two years


Dave
NR1DX

--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

Re: Topband: 160 portable vertical

[Artek Manuals]

PaT

What Mike says is only partially true about receiving antennas . 
Ideal yes . but not necessary...especially for a casual family 
vacation DXepedition and I think Mike might have missed the part where 
you said in DECEMBER, a quieter winter month . I worked well over 100 
countries with Inverted L's and no receiving antennas for years. This 
year alone I have worked 21 countries and 47 states so far this SUMMER 
with an inverted L and no receiving antenna ( over half of those on CW 
for you who like to trash FT8) . If you were going to do a contest and 
try to be highly competitive then a receiving antenna would be a good 
idea to be sure ...Maybe a BOG on the beach 8^). Your biggest challenge 
will be being heard at all, running QRP or low power... There are a few 
died in the wool low power guys on here who will disagree with me but 
160 is a big amp band IMO more so than any other.


Dave
NR1DX


On 8/7/2019 5:02 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
and then you need to be able to hear the people calling so you will 
want some kind of receiving antenna.


On 8/7/2019 11:13 AM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote:

Hi Pat,


Your #1 friend will be 127' of vertical(ish) wire (ie: inverted L) 
and a few
ground radial wires or better still 3-4 raised radials and a tall 
palm tree,

otherwise I am afraid you'll be sorely disappointed in any kind of short
compromise (loaded) antenna with summer (QRN) condx and QRP and/or LP 
(K2 is

15w, correct?).


There's no getting around physics and you're going to be very weak and a
full sized antenna is going to be your best bet to being heard.


GL


Mike VE9AA


Planning on going to some island in the Caribbean this December. 
Unless I

find

a friendly ham, will bring along my Elecraft k2 and operate qrp or lp.
Looking

for ideas on an easy to setup small vertical antenna to bring.


N8vw



Mike, Coreen & Corey

Keswick Ridge, NB


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


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




--
Dave
manu...@artekmanuals.com
www.ArtekManuals.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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