Your results of the order of performance of these antennas are somewhat different than other, published results. I wonder if the composition of your ground would have something to do with that? Good or poor soil? Also, how long was the Beverage? I have a SAL-30, which is by far my best receive antenna since I had to take down my Beverages, but my take away was the Beverages beat the SAL-30 most of the time. This is over medium to good soil. I would have expected the 8 circle to be better than all the others at least 90% of the time. (At least over good soil.)
I have been pondering which receive array to put up in a new location with plenty of room, so I have been looking at this. Chuck W5PR On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 11:19 AM Rodman, David <rod...@buffalo.edu> wrote: > > > > This is possibly a more complicated subject than just performance. I gave > a lecture on this topic, comparing a Hi-Z circle 8, SAL-20, SAL-30, > beverage (unidirectional and bidirectional and BOG) and the K9AY array. > > > In this talk, I considered performance as a factor, but also considered > maintenance, size, mechanical stability, cost and ease of construction and > installation. > > > All things considered, the top 2 at my QTH were the Hi-Z circle 8 and the > SAL-30. > > > Here is a quick summary of my findings. > > > Circle 8: highest cost, most complex to install and construct, requires > large footprint of land, best of all antennas as it requires almost NO > maintenance and performance second overall to the SAL-30. > > > SAL-30: modest cost, modest install and construct, modest footprint, > requires minimal repairs (usually to the coupler wires) but overall > performance best of all for directionality and gain. > > > SAL-20: modest cost and somewhat simpler than SAL-30 to install and small > footprint. Performance almost identical to the K9AY array. > > > K9AY: modest cost but slightly more complex to construct as compared to > SAL-20 and about the same size. Performance less than SAL-20 due to fewer > directions. > > > Beverage unidirectional: mechanical stability good when constructed with > copper coated steel wire #14 or larger. Gain fine when desiring only 1 > direction. Depending on the location may be placed in half a day from > start to finish. > > > Beverage bidirectional: mechanically unstable when constructed with > commercial products using either RG6 or twin lead. Requires frequent > repairs due to fatigue or failed connections. Performance overall is not > on par with other directional arrays. > > > BOG: simplest of all antennas to construct, install and maintain. Can be > installed in an hour or two. Should be unfolded at spring time each year > to keep wire from being incorporated into lawn. Convenient when only 200' > available. Can be band specific. > > > > Just a quick summary. My location does not lend itself to beverage > construction. about 2/3 of my 25 acres are heavily and complexly treed with > brush so overgrown that it can be a chore to do almost anything for > installation or repair. This is why I prefer the SAL-30 overall. The > circle 8 took me one summer (as my only project to install) by the time the > land was cleared, site measured, antennas constructed and all the coax > installed. The trade off is that this antenna has been the most > mechanically stable of any antenna that I have ever had. > > > --- > 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 > _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector