Elecraft

Random wire lengths for antennas

Classic

List

Threaded

39 messages Options

hhoyt

Re: [KX3] The "Kinda Random Antenna"

Hi Wayne,

I liked your description of the KRA. I recently employed the principle
for a KRAzy MacGuyver'ed NPOTA activation, documented here:

https://proaudioeng.com/bf07-moores-creek-npota-activation-12-30-2016/

The basic principle of 'use whatever you can, just get on the air!'
always applies! And it helps to have a rig like the KX3 with such an
excellent ATU!

Cheers & 73,

Howie - WA4PSC

On 1/29/2017 12:40 PM, Wayne Burdick [hidden email] [KX3] wrote:
>
> I'd call an ad-hoc antenna that works on multiple bands with an ATU a
> "Kinda-Random Antenna" (KRA). (Apologies to linguistic purists.)
>
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bill Frantz

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by k6dgw

Just recently, I was testing an 80W 2M amplifier into a dummy
load. I noticed that anytime I send a signal into it, it
triggered the local repeater. (I changed frequencies.) However,
I can work the local repeater from my living room with a HT set
at 100 mW, so it doesn't take much.

Now if I could only contact the contest and DX stations with
this little antenna and power.

73 Bill AE6JV

On 1/29/17 at 7:40 PM, [hidden email] (Ron D'Eau Claire) wrote:

>Most of us O.T.s (like you) have had the experience of using a 'grocery
>store dummy load' (ordinary incandescent light bulb) to test our rigs and
>had someone call us in return!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz |The nice thing about standards| Periwinkle
(408)356-8506 |is there are so many to choose| 16345
Englewood Ave
www.pwpconsult.com |from. - Andrew Tanenbaum | Los Gatos,
CA 95032

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Ignacy

Re: Random wire lengths for antennas

In reply to this post by Dean L

KXAT3 has trouble matching high impedance antennas. No problem matching anything using BL-1, BL-2, or any other 4:1 (or 9:1) balun although for odd impedances the balun may have substantial losses. But I prefer balun than antenna-tuner overheating.

Probably all wire longer than 1/4 lambda radiate nearly all. Vertical above 5/8 lambda start generating high lobes. Horizontal add a few db because of ground reflections but also lobes.

Once I made an experiment trying a vertical with a few radials, a random long wire with radials, or two random long wires as a semidipole, all fed by TV ribbon. In all cases, two random wires were the best, often by far, across bands. But setting up a portable vertical is easy, one long wire is hard, and 2 long wire is the hardest.

In a nutshell, random wires are fine with exact length unimportant. If tuning problems, use a small balun.

Ignacy, NO9E

Emory Schley

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by Barry K3NDM

I've found over the years that a McCoy Dipole works pretty well, often MUCH better than expected. What is a McCoy Dipole? Named after Lew McCoy, it follows his rules of construction. "Make it as long as you can, get it as high as you can, and feed it with ladder-line." No math, no measurements, no sweat. But a TUNER (transmatch) is definitely needed.

Emory Schley
N4LP

Kurt N. Sterba was correct. Textbook antennas aren't always
possible, or even needed. If the situation is difficult, any radiator is
better than none. However, hams in general are anal animals on the
subject of antennas. My attitude has always been what's a db or two
among friends, and quite often that is the number we are sweating. But,
if you can't make it exactly like Kraus writes, get as close as you can
and let your antenna tuner worry about the match and don't think about
that extra db.

73,
Barry
K3NDM

------ Original Message ------
From: "Fred Jensen" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: 1/29/2017 6:10:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"

>N6BT famously set up a "phased array" of 3 light bulbs in a V-beam
>configuration and achieved WAC. He called it "The Illuminator." Kurt
>N. Sterba [a regular in the old WorldRadio] is correct, the power will
>go somewhere. My home antenna is a 136' wire strung along the wood
>fence on electric fence insulators. Fed at the end, no overt
>counterpoise [the outside of the coax shield handles that]. Not spec'd
>for 160 but the KAT3 matches it fine. Invisible to HOA. NVIS on 160
>and 80, semi-NVIS on 40.
>
>One thing to remember: feeding electrically long wires results in
>complicated radiation patterns. The higher in frequency you go, the
>more it's going to squirt your RF in different directions, not all of
>which point at the DX. But, mine works very well considering it's
>about 1.8 m off the ground.
>
>73,
>
>Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
>Sparks NV DM09dn
>Washoe County
>
>On 1/29/2017 10:26 AM, Barry wrote:
>>Wayne,
>> I know what you are saying and agree. In very simple terms, if you
>>can load it, it will radiate. That was a position that a writer with
>>the nom de plume of Kurt N Sterba too in a book he wrote. By the
>>physical law of conservation of energy, it all has to go somewhere.
>>And, that could be heat or radiation. In his book he claims to have
>>loaded a shopping cart and talked to people.
>>
>> Yes, you can do these things as long as you make good connections
>>and the tuners can handle it. All of the discussion is how to pick a
>>length that the tuner will accept. Once there, physics takes over. And
>>just to prove my point, and yours, I just worked the CQ 160 CW
>>contest. My antenna was a vertical 20 meter dipole center fed with
>>open wire. My radio is a K3s. I worked across this country, Canada,
>>and some DX with this 33' wire antenna that by all rights should have
>>been over 200'. I would have done better, but my local power company
>>added another handicap, line noise. Bottom line: Throw some wire up
>>and see if it can be loaded. If yes, go for it.
>>
>>73,
>>Barry
>>K3NDM
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm[http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm]
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net[http://www.qsl.net]
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html[http://www.qsl.net/donate.html]
>Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft[http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft]
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm[http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm]
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net[http://www.qsl.net]
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html[http://www.qsl.net/donate.html]
Message delivered to [hidden email]
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Barry K3NDM

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

Yep. A good antenna tuner and ladder line hides a whole lot of stuff.
Where would I be with my 40' X 110' yard if I really worried about being
exact. I have DXCC mixed, CW, and SSB, and I never ran over 100 Watts
nor had a real "resonant" antenna. And, I've forgotten all of the math I
ever had in college more than 50 years ago; I get a headache when I
think of ever having to do math again.

73,
Barry
K3NDM

------ Original Message ------
From: "Emory Schley" <[hidden email]>
To:
Cc: [hidden email]
Sent: 1/30/2017 8:38:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"

>
>I've found over the years that a McCoy Dipole works pretty well, often
>MUCH better than expected. What is a McCoy Dipole? Named after Lew
>McCoy, it follows his rules of construction. "Make it as long as you
>can, get it as high as you can, and feed it with ladder-line." No math,
>no measurements, no sweat. But a TUNER (transmatch) is definitely
>needed.
>
>Emory Schley
>N4LP
>
>
>Kurt N. Sterba was correct. Textbook antennas aren't always
>possible, or even needed. If the situation is difficult, any radiator
>is
>better than none. However, hams in general are anal animals on the
>subject of antennas. My attitude has always been what's a db or two
>among friends, and quite often that is the number we are sweating. But,
>if you can't make it exactly like Kraus writes, get as close as you can
>and let your antenna tuner worry about the match and don't think about
>that extra db.
>
>73,
>Barry
>K3NDM
>
>------ Original Message ------
>From: "Fred Jensen" <[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]
>Sent: 1/29/2017 6:10:29 PM
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"
>
>>N6BT famously set up a "phased array" of 3 light bulbs in a V-beam
>>configuration and achieved WAC. He called it "The Illuminator." Kurt
>>N. Sterba [a regular in the old WorldRadio] is correct, the power will
>>go somewhere. My home antenna is a 136' wire strung along the wood
>>fence on electric fence insulators. Fed at the end, no overt
>>counterpoise [the outside of the coax shield handles that]. Not spec'd
>>for 160 but the KAT3 matches it fine. Invisible to HOA. NVIS on 160
>>and 80, semi-NVIS on 40.
>>
>>One thing to remember: feeding electrically long wires results in
>>complicated radiation patterns. The higher in frequency you go, the
>>more it's going to squirt your RF in different directions, not all of
>>which point at the DX. But, mine works very well considering it's
>>about 1.8 m off the ground.
>>
>>73,
>>
>>Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
>>Sparks NV DM09dn
>>Washoe County
>>
>>On 1/29/2017 10:26 AM, Barry wrote:
>>>Wayne,
>>> I know what you are saying and agree. In very simple terms, if you
>>>can load it, it will radiate. That was a position that a writer with
>>>the nom de plume of Kurt N Sterba too in a book he wrote. By the
>>>physical law of conservation of energy, it all has to go somewhere.
>>>And, that could be heat or radiation. In his book he claims to have
>>>loaded a shopping cart and talked to people.
>>>
>>> Yes, you can do these things as long as you make good connections
>>>and the tuners can handle it. All of the discussion is how to pick a
>>>length that the tuner will accept. Once there, physics takes over.
>>>And
>>>just to prove my point, and yours, I just worked the CQ 160 CW
>>>contest. My antenna was a vertical 20 meter dipole center fed with
>>>open wire. My radio is a K3s. I worked across this country, Canada,
>>>and some DX with this 33' wire antenna that by all rights should have
>>>been over 200'. I would have done better, but my local power company
>>>added another handicap, line noise. Bottom line: Throw some wire up
>>>and see if it can be loaded. If yes, go for it.
>>>
>>>73,
>>>Barry
>>>K3NDM
>>
>>______________________________________________________________
>>Elecraft mailing list
>>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>Help:
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm[http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm]
>>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net[http://www.qsl.net]
>>Please help support this email list:
>>http://www.qsl.net/donate.html[http://www.qsl.net/donate.html]
>>Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home:
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft[http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft]
>Help:
>http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm[http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm]
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net[http://www.qsl.net]
>Please help support this email list:
>http://www.qsl.net/donate.html[http://www.qsl.net/donate.html]
>Message delivered to [hidden email]
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bill K9YEQ

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

OH YES, the headaches from looking at the formulas at this stage of the
game. A friend added two coils to the end of his 75 meter dipole for 160.
He loads it but has no clue as to impedance and loading. He tunes it for
160 but it is not effective. The idea is to get loading into an efficient
radiator. OK to accept less to operate, but great to be efficient. SO if
it is working, sometimes leave it alone. Erect another before taking down
or modifying what works.

73,
Bill
K9YEQ

-----Original Message-----
From

Yep. A good antenna tuner and ladder line hides a whole lot of stuff.
Where would I be with my 40' X 110' yard if I really worried about being
exact. I have DXCC mixed, CW, and SSB, and I never ran over 100 Watts nor
had a real "resonant" antenna. And, I've forgotten all of the math I ever
had in college more than 50 years ago; I get a headache when I think of ever
having to do math again.

73,
Barry
K3NDM

------ Original Message ------
From: "Emory Schley" <[hidden email]>

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by Barry K3NDM

Lots of dipole calculators on the net. The total length of a center fed
dipole is 1/2 wave, and that's the magic number.

If you are operating at 14.300 and you're trying to end-feed a wire that
is 32.7 feet long (same length as a dipole, but *not* fed at the
middle), the impedance will be very high.

Add 16.3 feet, and you won't be a half-wave, you'll be 3/4 wave long,
and the impedance at the end should be well within the range of a good
tuner.

Double the length, and you're at a full wave, and it's the same
impedance (more or less) as trying to end-feed a half-wave.

Doesn't matter what you do, if your "randomly chosen" length turns out
to be a multiple of one half wave on a frequency you want to use, then
the stock tuner in most any radio is going to have trouble tuning it.

73 -- Lynn
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Barry K3NDM

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by Bill K9YEQ

Bill,
There are many factors that could impact on his system
effectiveness. The one that most comes to mind is height above ground.
160 meters can be a real problem. If it is a horizontal, the average ham
antenna height of 35-50 feet is very, very low electrically. Two things
would happen here. First, a lot of energy is being lost to ground, and
second, the radiated signal will be at high angle. Remember, a quarter
wave on 160 meters is on the order of 135 feet which is the point where
you get maximum radiation straight up. At lower heights, gains upward
goes down and doesn't fill in toward the horizon. The means electrically
low antennas are not effective.

The other area that comes to mind is the feed system itself. Not
mentioned is whether open wire is being used. I would guess that the
system SWR may be very high meaning losses on coax should be much
greater than a 1 db. And, some tuners are not low loss when operated at
their extremes.

I get away with what I do ONLY because my 20 meter vertical antenna
is less effected by being low, I feed it with ladder line which has low
loss even at absurdly high SWRs, and the tuner I use is designed to be
used with antennas that are no where near optimum.

From what I did this weekend, I could surmise that my 33' radiator
was radiating everything it received. If there is someone who really
wants to do a math problem, I'll measure exactly the transmission line
length, but I suspect that basically the about 60 feet of open wire
helped. I would guess that the antenna reflected a very low impedance
with a large reactive component, and the line length helped in
translating the antenna impedance to something better handled by the
tuner. Therefore, my losses are contained.

73,
Barry
K3NDM

------ Original Message ------
From: "Bill Johnson" <[hidden email]>
To: "'Barry'" <[hidden email]>; "'Emory Schley'"
<[hidden email]>
Cc: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Sent: 1/30/2017 9:42:35 PM
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"

>OH YES, the headaches from looking at the formulas at this stage of
>the
>game. A friend added two coils to the end of his 75 meter dipole for
>160.
>He loads it but has no clue as to impedance and loading. He tunes it
>for
>160 but it is not effective. The idea is to get loading into an
>efficient
>radiator. OK to accept less to operate, but great to be efficient. SO
>if
>it is working, sometimes leave it alone. Erect another before taking
>down
>or modifying what works.
>
>73,
>Bill
>K9YEQ
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From
>
>Yep. A good antenna tuner and ladder line hides a whole lot of stuff.
>Where would I be with my 40' X 110' yard if I really worried about
>being
>exact. I have DXCC mixed, CW, and SSB, and I never ran over 100 Watts
>nor
>had a real "resonant" antenna. And, I've forgotten all of the math I
>ever
>had in college more than 50 years ago; I get a headache when I think of
>ever
>having to do math again.
>
>73,
>Barry
>K3NDM
>
>------ Original Message ------
>From: "Emory Schley" <[hidden email]>
>>
>>I've found over the years that a McCoy Dipole works pretty well, often
>>MUCH better than expected. What is a McCoy Dipole? Named after Lew
>>McCoy, it follows his rules of construction. "Make it as long as you
>>can, get it as high as you can, and feed it with ladder-line." No
>>math,
>>no measurements, no sweat. But a TUNER (transmatch) is definitely
>>needed.
>>
>>Emory Schley
>>N4LP
>>
>>
>>Kurt N. Sterba was correct. Textbook antennas aren't always
>>possible, or even needed. If the situation is difficult, any radiator
>>is
>>better than none. However, hams in general are anal animals on the
>>subject of antennas. My attitude has always been what's a db or two
>>among friends, and quite often that is the number we are sweating.
>>But,
>>if you can't make it exactly like Kraus writes, get as close as you
>>can
>>and let your antenna tuner worry about the match and don't think about
>>that extra db.
>>
>>73,
>>Barry
>>K3NDM
>>
>>------ Original Message ------
>>From: "Fred Jensen" <[hidden email]>
>>
>>>N6BT famously set up a "phased array" of 3 light bulbs in a V-beam
>>>configuration and achieved WAC. He called it "The Illuminator." Kurt
>>>N. Sterba [a regular in the old WorldRadio] is correct, the power
>>>will
>>>go somewhere. My home antenna is a 136' wire strung along the wood
>>>fence on electric fence insulators. Fed at the end, no overt
>>>counterpoise [the outside of the coax shield handles that]. Not
>>>spec'd
>>>for 160 but the KAT3 matches it fine. Invisible to HOA. NVIS on 160
>>>and 80, semi-NVIS on 40.
>>>
>>>One thing to remember: feeding electrically long wires results in
>>>complicated radiation patterns. The higher in frequency you go, the
>>>more it's going to squirt your RF in different directions, not all of
>>>which point at the DX. But, mine works very well considering it's
>>>about 1.8 m off the ground.
>>>
>>>73,
>>>
>>>Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
>>>
>>>On 1/29/2017 10:26 AM, Barry wrote:
>>>>Wayne,
>>>> I know what you are saying and agree. In very simple terms, if you
>>>>can load it, it will radiate. That was a position that a writer with
>>>>the nom de plume of Kurt N Sterba too in a book he wrote. By the
>>>>physical law of conservation of energy, it all has to go somewhere.
>>>>And, that could be heat or radiation. In his book he claims to have
>>>>loaded a shopping cart and talked to people.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, you can do these things as long as you make good connections
>>>>and the tuners can handle it. All of the discussion is how to pick a
>>>>length that the tuner will accept. Once there, physics takes over.
>>>>And
>>>>just to prove my point, and yours, I just worked the CQ 160 CW
>>>>contest. My antenna was a vertical 20 meter dipole center fed with
>>>>open wire. My radio is a K3s. I worked across this country, Canada,
>>>>and some DX with this 33' wire antenna that by all rights should
>>>>have
>>>>been over 200'. I would have done better, but my local power company
>>>>added another handicap, line noise. Bottom line: Throw some wire up
>>>>and see if it can be loaded. If yes, go for it.
>>>>
>>>>73,
>>>>Barry
>>>>K3NDM
>>>

Barry K3NDM

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by k6dgw

Ron,
Mea culpa. You are right. I misused definitions. I use doublets. :-)

73,
Barry
K3NDM

------ Original Message ------
From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]>
To: "'Emory Schley'" <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]
Sent: 1/30/2017 9:54:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"

>Yep, that is my favorite antenna for H.F. fed with open wire line and a
>balanced tuner.
>
> But I never refer to it as a "dipole" since the classic definition of
>a dipole means it is 1/2 wave long. What you describe is what us O.T.s
>call a "doublet" or "center fed wire".
>
>73, Ron AC7AC
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>Emory Schley
>Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 5:38 PM
>Cc: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"
>
>
>I've found over the years that a McCoy Dipole works pretty well, often
>MUCH better than expected. What is a McCoy Dipole? Named after Lew
>McCoy, it follows his rules of construction. "Make it as long as you
>can, get it as high as you can, and feed it with ladder-line." No math,
>no measurements, no sweat. But a TUNER (transmatch) is definitely
>needed.
>
>Emory Schley
>N4LP
>
>
>Kurt N. Sterba was correct. Textbook antennas aren't always possible,
>or even needed. If the situation is difficult, any radiator is better
>than none. However, hams in general are anal animals on the subject of
>antennas. My attitude has always been what's a db or two among friends,
>and quite often that is the number we are sweating. But, if you can't
>make it exactly like Kraus writes, get as close as you can and let your
>antenna tuner worry about the match and don't think about that extra
>db.
>
>73,
>Barry
>K3NDM
>
>------ Original Message ------
>From: "Fred Jensen" <[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]
>Sent: 1/29/2017 6:10:29 PM
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"
>
>>N6BT famously set up a "phased array" of 3 light bulbs in a V-beam
>>configuration and achieved WAC. He called it "The Illuminator." Kurt
>>N.
>>Sterba [a regular in the old WorldRadio] is correct, the power will go
>>somewhere. My home antenna is a 136' wire strung along the wood fence
>>on electric fence insulators. Fed at the end, no overt counterpoise
>>[the outside of the coax shield handles that]. Not spec'd for 160 but
>>the KAT3 matches it fine. Invisible to HOA. NVIS on 160 and 80,
>>semi-NVIS on 40.
>>
>>One thing to remember: feeding electrically long wires results in
>>complicated radiation patterns. The higher in frequency you go, the
>>more it's going to squirt your RF in different directions, not all of
>>which point at the DX. But, mine works very well considering it's
>>about
>>1.8 m off the ground.
>>
>>73,
>>
>>Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
>>Sparks NV DM09dn
>>Washoe County
>>
>>On 1/29/2017 10:26 AM, Barry wrote:
>>>Wayne,
>>> I know what you are saying and agree. In very simple terms, if you
>>>can load it, it will radiate. That was a position that a writer with
>>>the nom de plume of Kurt N Sterba too in a book he wrote. By the
>>>physical law of conservation of energy, it all has to go somewhere.
>>>And, that could be heat or radiation. In his book he claims to have
>>>loaded a shopping cart and talked to people.
>>>
>>> Yes, you can do these things as long as you make good connections
>>>and
>>>the tuners can handle it. All of the discussion is how to pick a
>>>length that the tuner will accept. Once there, physics takes over.
>>>And
>>>just to prove my point, and yours, I just worked the CQ 160 CW
>>>contest. My antenna was a vertical 20 meter dipole center fed with
>>>open wire. My radio is a K3s. I worked across this country, Canada,
>>>and some DX with this 33' wire antenna that by all rights should have
>>>been over 200'. I would have done better, but my local power company
>>>added another handicap, line noise. Bottom line: Throw some wire up
>>>and see if it can be loaded. If yes, go for it.
>>>
>>>73,
>>>Barry
>>>K3NDM
>>
>>______________________________________________________________
>>Elecraft mailing list
>>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>Help:
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm[http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm]
>>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net[http://www.qsl.net]
>>Please help support this email list:
>>http://www.qsl.net/donate.html[http://www.qsl.net/donate.html]
>>Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home:
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft[http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft]
>Help:
>http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm[http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm]
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net[http://www.qsl.net]
>Please help support this email list:
>http://www.qsl.net/donate.html[http://www.qsl.net/donate.html]
>Message delivered to [hidden email]
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>Message delivered to [hidden email]

Wes Stewart-2

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by Barry K3NDM

Sadly, this is often untrue.

Get Dan's (AC6LA) program at: http://ac6la.com/tldetails1.html and run some
examples.

for more on ladder line see: http://k6mhe.com/n7ws/Ladder_Line.pdf

On 1/30/2017 9:00 PM, Barry wrote:
> ...I feed it with ladder line which has low loss even at absurdly high SWRs,
> and the tuner I use is designed to be used with antennas that are no where
> near optimum.

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Barry K3NDM

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

My points when I started this were open wire can help in a bad
situation. I was not using 130' antenna, but one that was only 33'. And
I was able to get out. Which leads to my second point. Some of us live
in areas or on property that is not best suited for HF antennas, but so
what. With a little thought, a bad situation can be made to work out
pretty well. And lastly, throw something up and try it; you never know
just what might happen.

As an aside, I was surprised that I could load a 33' on 160, and more
surprised when I was actually able to get out of my state; I live in
Maryland. Morocco and Mexico where a shock. And, I will admit you can do
things during contests that are nearly impossible at other times.

Something to consider. Open wire was around almost as far back as
Marconi, and maybe he used it. It has little loss even at high SWR, far,
far less than coax in the extreme. In the olden days, no one really
worried about SWR losses. Open wire was the common transmission line.
Antenna tuners weren't really around, either.The trick that was done in
those times was to have your final amplifier's tank circuit tune to the
output frequency and act as the antenna coupler. In fact, the commercial
station on Montauk Point at the tip of Long Island used to use rhombic
antennas pointed toward Europe. The station engineer told me that the
SWR was around 14:1 and he didn't worry too much about it as the loss on
the line to his antenna was about 1 db and the a swinging link took care
of the match.

As hams in today's world, there are a few things that can be done to get
out on HF. Putting up the biggest antenna with the most gain is at the
top of the list. But, not everyone has the ability to do as some of my
friends like W3LPL, for instance, are able to do. But, there is one
thing that many hams overlook, cut the loss from your radio to the
antenna. That means use the transmission line that has the least loss
for the situation and make sure you can operate your antenna tuner, if
needed, in a range that has its losses at a minimum.

Do not worry about resonance. Most of us use antennas that if they were
resonant wouldn't reflect 50 Ohms anyway.

73,
Barry
K3NDM

------ Original Message ------
From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: 1/31/2017 11:53:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"

>The intrinsic higher impedance of ladder line helps reduce the losses
>through a lower SWR than typical coax. A center fed wire at least 1/4
>wave
>long end-to-end on the lowest frequency used (e.g. 130 feet on 160
>meters)
>and fed with typical 350 to 450 ohm ladder line will show an SWR of
>10:1 or
>less across the HF spectrum, since a real-world wire will show an
>impedance
>of only 4,000 ohms or so even when it is exactly 1/2 wavelength long.
>
>Feeding the same antenna with 50 ohm coaxial line will result in an SWR
>100:1 or greater and so much greater losses.
>
>73, Ron AC7AC
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>Wes
>Stewart
>Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 5:07 AM
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"
>
>Sadly, this is often untrue.
>
>Get Dan's (AC6LA) program at: http://ac6la.com/tldetails1.html and run
>some
>examples.
>
>for more on ladder line see: http://k6mhe.com/n7ws/Ladder_Line.pdf
>
>On 1/30/2017 9:00 PM, Barry wrote:
>> ...I feed it with ladder line which has low loss even at absurdly
>>high
>> SWRs, and the tuner I use is designed to be used with antennas that
>> are no where near optimum.
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>Message
>delivered to [hidden email]
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>Message delivered to [hidden email]

Vic Rosenthal

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

I disagree. A center fed quarter wave will have a complex impedance of a few ohms of resistance and a very large capacitive reactance. SWR can be 100:1. I know, I am doing it. Why it works with good open wire line is that the line can transform the impedance to something that is easy to match with a practical tuner.
For example, in my case I feed a half-size doublet with about a quarter wave of real open wire line, and it looks like a large INDUCTIVE reactance and high resistance at the shack end! It's easy to knock out the inductive reactance efficiently with a pair of capacitors, and a 4:1 balun transforms the high resistance to a value that gives about a 5:1 SWR on the short coax to the tuner.
There is still (in my case) about 2.5 dB loss in the feed line due to SWR even at 40m, but I just run a kW instead of 500 watts and come out ahead.

Vic 4X6GP

> On 31 Jan 2017, at 18:53, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> The intrinsic higher impedance of ladder line helps reduce the losses
> through a lower SWR than typical coax. A center fed wire at least 1/4 wave
> long end-to-end on the lowest frequency used (e.g. 130 feet on 160 meters)
> and fed with typical 350 to 450 ohm ladder line will show an SWR of 10:1 or
> less across the HF spectrum, since a real-world wire will show an impedance
> of only 4,000 ohms or so even when it is exactly 1/2 wavelength long.
>
> Feeding the same antenna with 50 ohm coaxial line will result in an SWR
> 100:1 or greater and so much greater losses.
>
> 73, Ron AC7AC
>

Wes Stewart-2

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

A 130' dipole, 60' high on 160 has a feed point Z of ~4.5 -j1200. One hundred
feet of Wireman 553 (typical ladderline) will transform this to ~7.5 +j16 at the
input. The total loss in this "low-loss" line is over 12 dB.

On 1/31/2017 9:53 AM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:

> The intrinsic higher impedance of ladder line helps reduce the losses
> through a lower SWR than typical coax. A center fed wire at least 1/4 wave
> long end-to-end on the lowest frequency used (e.g. 130 feet on 160 meters)
> and fed with typical 350 to 450 ohm ladder line will show an SWR of 10:1 or
> less across the HF spectrum, since a real-world wire will show an impedance
> of only 4,000 ohms or so even when it is exactly 1/2 wavelength long.
>
> Feeding the same antenna with 50 ohm coaxial line will result in an SWR
> 100:1 or greater and so much greater losses.
>
> 73, Ron AC7AC
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Wes
> Stewart
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 5:07 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] The "Kinda Random Antenna"
>
> Sadly, this is often untrue.
>
> Get Dan's (AC6LA) program at: http://ac6la.com/tldetails1.html and run some
> examples.
>
> for more on ladder line see: http://k6mhe.com/n7ws/Ladder_Line.pdf
>
> On 1/30/2017 9:00 PM, Barry wrote:
>> ...I feed it with ladder line which has low loss even at absurdly high
>> SWRs, and the tuner I use is designed to be used with antennas that
>> are no where near optimum.

Clay Autery

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

Something doesn't seem right with that.... Care to post the math? Not
saying you're wrong, and I'd check it myself, but I'm otherwise occupied
this evening.

______________________
Clay Autery, KY5G
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 1/31/2017 4:12 PM, Wes Stewart wrote:
> A 130' dipole, 60' high on 160 has a feed point Z of ~4.5 -j1200. One
> hundred feet of Wireman 553 (typical ladderline) will transform this
> to ~7.5 +j16 at the input. The total loss in this "low-loss" line is
> over 12 dB.
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Wes Stewart-2

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

I calculated the antenna using AutoEZ invoking EZNEC v6.0.9. Transmission line
calculations using TLDetails (previously referenced) and/or if you have Excel,
LineLoss.xls. All except for EZNEC available from AC6LA.com. Dan has a wealth
of information on his site, all of it fabulous documented.

Some editions of the ARRL Antenna Book had material on "Highly Reactive Loads",
shamelessly stolen from my correspondence with ARRL that also presented some of
this.

On 1/31/2017 3:28 PM, Clay Autery wrote:

> Something doesn't seem right with that.... Care to post the math? Not
> saying you're wrong, and I'd check it myself, but I'm otherwise occupied
> this evening.
>
> ______________________
> Clay Autery, KY5G
> MONTAC Enterprises
> (318) 518-1389
>
> On 1/31/2017 4:12 PM, Wes Stewart wrote:
>> A 130' dipole, 60' high on 160 has a feed point Z of ~4.5 -j1200. One
>> hundred feet of Wireman 553 (typical ladderline) will transform this
>> to ~7.5 +j16 at the input. The total loss in this "low-loss" line is
>> over 12 dB.
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

John Oppenheimer

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

Wireman 553 uses a 19 strand Copper Clad Steal (CCS) conductor which
results with very thin copper cladding. 553 is skin saturated at about
15 MHz. The loss at 1.8 MHz is approximately 0.21 dB per 100 feet.

http://www.kn5l.net/wm553/

Using EZNEC and SimSmith for the antenna below results with 13.8 dB
transmission line loss. Slightly greater loss then Wes' calculations.

John KN5L

On 01/31/2017 04:12 PM, Wes Stewart wrote:
> A 130' dipole, 60' high on 160 has a feed point Z of ~4.5 -j1200. One hundred
> feet of Wireman 553 (typical ladderline) will transform this to ~7.5 +j16 at the
> input. The total loss in this "low-loss" line is over 12 dB.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Clay Autery

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

Thanks... and if I missed a response from the OP, thank as well.

Well then... that seems to vindicate my desire to avoid CCS wire and
"overengineer" with the use of larger wire diameters.
And it clues me in to pay attention to every single detail when
designing a transmission line system.

Thanks again...

73,

______________________
Clay Autery, KY5G
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 2/1/2017 6:25 AM, John Oppenheimer wrote:

> Wireman 553 uses a 19 strand Copper Clad Steal (CCS) conductor which
> results with very thin copper cladding. 553 is skin saturated at about
> 15 MHz. The loss at 1.8 MHz is approximately 0.21 dB per 100 feet.
>
> http://www.kn5l.net/wm553/
>
> Using EZNEC and SimSmith for the antenna below results with 13.8 dB
> transmission line loss. Slightly greater loss then Wes' calculations.
>
> John KN5L
>
> On 01/31/2017 04:12 PM, Wes Stewart wrote:
>> A 130' dipole, 60' high on 160 has a feed point Z of ~4.5 -j1200. One hundred
>> feet of Wireman 553 (typical ladderline) will transform this to ~7.5 +j16 at the
>> input. The total loss in this "low-loss" line is over 12 dB.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

This may not always be possible.

Copper-clad steel exists because it's stronger than copper. Wind, ice,
or simply a long span can exceed the strength of copper, and then you
don't have an antenna at all.

"Over-engineering" by making the wire bigger also makes it heaver and
gives it a larger cross section (more windage).

I guess you could take your large diameter copper and wrap it around
something else to hold it up, but that's basically the idea behind
copper clad steel.

To me, the earlier post means that not all copper-clad wire is suitable
for all antennas -- with #553 as an example.

73 -- Lynn

On 2/1/2017 10:57 AM, Clay Autery wrote:
> Well then... that seems to vindicate my desire to avoid CCS wire and
> "overengineer" with the use of larger wire diameters.

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

John Oppenheimer

Re: The "Kinda Random Antenna"

501 ladder line #18 solid CCS copper thickness is 0.0717 mm
http://copperweld.com/sites/copperweld.com/files/w30ccs-ed5230.pdf

RF skin saturation is well below 1 MHz using the calculator:
http://owenduffy.net/calc/SkinDepth.htm

551 is #18, 19/30 stranded, #30 CCS copper thickness is 0.0178 mm

John KN5L

On 02/01/2017 01:18 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:

> This may not always be possible.
>
> Copper-clad steel exists because it's stronger than copper. Wind, ice,
> or simply a long span can exceed the strength of copper, and then you
> don't have an antenna at all.
>
> "Over-engineering" by making the wire bigger also makes it heaver and
> gives it a larger cross section (more windage).
>
> I guess you could take your large diameter copper and wrap it around
> something else to hold it up, but that's basically the idea behind
> copper clad steel.
>
> To me, the earlier post means that not all copper-clad wire is suitable
> for all antennas -- with #553 as an example.
>
> 73 -- Lynn
>
> On 2/1/2017 10:57 AM, Clay Autery wrote:
>> Well then... that seems to vindicate my desire to avoid CCS wire and
>> "overengineer" with the use of larger wire diameters.