WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V
Locked
 
|
I'm installing a used Butternut HF-6v, and the location / elevation
would work with the CPK raised counterpoise. So I'm looking for a counterpoise kit for a B.Nut HF-6V.. Also, wanting to add 6m, but that's trivial, unless someone has it sitting around.... Anything out there ? Niel WA7SSA _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Niel Skousen wrote:
> I'm installing a used Butternut HF-6v, and the location / elevation > would work with the CPK raised counterpoise. So I'm looking for a > counterpoise kit for a B.Nut HF-6V.. Also, wanting to add 6m, but > that's trivial, unless someone has it sitting around.... You don't need an expensive 'kit'! Just take any old wire and make two 1/4 wavelength radials for each band -- a total of 12 radials. Try to make them as symmetrical as possible, with the two 40 meter radials opposite each other, etc. The ends of the radials must be well-insulated, since even though they are connected to the coax braid at the center, they will develop high-ish voltages at the ends. -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V
|
|
At 04:54 PM 8/19/2008, Vic K2VCO wrote:
>Niel Skousen wrote: >>I'm installing a used Butternut HF-6v, and the location / elevation >>would work with the CPK raised counterpoise. So I'm looking for a >>counterpoise kit for a B.Nut HF-6V.. Also, wanting to add 6m, but >>that's trivial, unless someone has it sitting around.... > >You don't need an expensive 'kit'! Just take any old wire and make >two 1/4 wavelength radials for each band -- a total of 12 radials. >Try to make them as symmetrical as possible, with the two 40 meter >radials opposite each other, etc. > >The ends of the radials must be well-insulated, since even though >they are connected to the coax braid at the center, they will >develop high-ish voltages at the ends. >-- >73, >Vic, K2VCO Details on making a multiband radial from twin-lead are at: http://www.bencher.com/pdfs/00366IZV.pdf Jerry W4UK _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V
|
|
Remember (or understand if you did not before) that elevated radials
should be tuned (pruned for length) just like a part of the antenna (they *are* part of the antenna). So get out your antenna analyzer and cut one radial a bit on the long side - attach only that one radial to the vertical and shorten it until you have the correct readings on the antenna analyzer. Cut the second radial to the same length - move to the next band and do the same thing until you are done. Note that the radials can interact on a multiband setup (just like parallel dipoles), so tune the lowest bands first and move upward in frequency one band at a time. The twinlead solution does work, but suffers badly from interaction. 73, Don W3FPR Jerry Flanders wrote: > At 04:54 PM 8/19/2008, Vic K2VCO wrote: >> Niel Skousen wrote: >>> I'm installing a used Butternut HF-6v, and the location / elevation >>> would work with the CPK raised counterpoise. So I'm looking for a >>> counterpoise kit for a B.Nut HF-6V.. Also, wanting to add 6m, but >>> that's trivial, unless someone has it sitting around.... >> >> You don't need an expensive 'kit'! Just take any old wire and make two >> 1/4 wavelength radials for each band -- a total of 12 radials. Try to >> make them as symmetrical as possible, with the two 40 meter radials >> opposite each other, etc. >> >> The ends of the radials must be well-insulated, since even though they >> are connected to the coax braid at the center, they will develop >> high-ish voltages at the ends. >> -- >> 73, >> Vic, K2VCO > > Details on making a multiband radial from twin-lead are at: > http://www.bencher.com/pdfs/00366IZV.pdf > > Jerry W4UK Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
LONG: Background info on Re: WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V
|
|
Hi Don (and all who have offered advice & help)
Thanks to all for the input that has been offered. Based on some of the comments, I thought I might share the 'rest of the story', both to seek additional input, and to show the technical trade off's associated with a compromise antenna environment. I'm installing a used HF-6v in a CCR environment, so I have some environment limitations. The CCR 'enforcement' committee is not horribly aggressive, but if I don't aggravate the situation, I'm much better off. I have a 24' tree, with some 3-4' bushes at the base, in a desert/rock landscaped front yard. The back has no 'cover' yet, and antenna's are more visible in spite of a fence. The plan is to install the antenna obscured by the tree, in the front yard. Given the landscaping, ground mounted with a full radial system is not possible so elevating the antenna as high as possible without guys or objectionable visibility wash chosen. My last HF-6V had 32 ea 32' buried radials, wish I could reproduce that ! So, the HF6 will be mounted about 4' off the ground, a full elevated radial system is not possible. Choices seem to be the CPK solution from Butternut or a modified radial system. Two options are being considered on the modified radials. First, 3 tuned radials (either individual wires for 40/15, 30, 20, 15,10 or the Butternut tuned twinlead variety) could be connected at the base of the antenna, then run down (hidden in the bushes) at a 60 degree angle to ground level, then run under/around the rocks. Performance is expected to be better than the CPK, but still a compromise. Routing is not linear. Tuning of this radial environment is expected to be a bear ! The second, the CPK, is expected to be enhanced by the low elevation, but NOT as effective as a good ground radial system. I might be able to enhance this configuration by laying out a psuedo radial set of 6-10 8' wires at the base of the 4' mast, which would more accurately be a surface capacitive element to enhance the CPK's effect. In neither case will the near field ground losses be impacted. There are some spiral wound counterpoise idea's out on the web, as well as some thoughts on constant angle spirals, which are tempting, but at this juncture, I expect to lean to the CPK to get it up and running, with spirals and experiments to follow... So any additional input, idea's, are solicited and welcome Thanks again all, Niel Don Wilhelm wrote: > Remember (or understand if you did not before) that elevated radials > should be tuned (pruned for length) just like a part of the antenna > (they *are* part of the antenna). > > So get out your antenna analyzer and cut one radial a bit on the long > side - attach only that one radial to the vertical and shorten it until > you have the correct readings on the antenna analyzer. Cut the second > radial to the same length - move to the next band and do the same thing > until you are done. Note that the radials can interact on a multiband > setup (just like parallel dipoles), so tune the lowest bands first and > move upward in frequency one band at a time. > > The twinlead solution does work, but suffers badly from interaction. > > 73, > Don W3FPR > > Jerry Flanders wrote: >> At 04:54 PM 8/19/2008, Vic K2VCO wrote: >>> >>> You don't need an expensive 'kit'! Just take any old wire and make >>> two 1/4 wavelength radials for each band -- a total of 12 radials. >>> Try to make them as symmetrical as possible, with the two 40 meter >>> radials opposite each other, etc. >>> >>> The ends of the radials must be well-insulated, since even though >>> they are connected to the coax braid at the center, they will develop >>> high-ish voltages at the ends. >>> -- >>> 73, >>> Vic, K2VCO >> >> Details on making a multiband radial from twin-lead are at: >> http://www.bencher.com/pdfs/00366IZV.pdf >> >> Jerry W4UK Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: LONG: Background info on Re: WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V
|
|
At 11:59 AM 8/20/2008, Niel Skousen wrote:
>... >I have a 24' tree, with some 3-4' bushes at the base, in a desert/rock >landscaped front yard. The back has no 'cover' yet, and antenna's are >more visible in spite of a fence. The plan is to install the antenna >obscured by the tree, in the front yard. Given the landscaping, ground >mounted with a full radial system is not possible so elevating the >antenna as high as possible without guys or objectionable visibility >wash chosen. My last HF-6V had 32 ea 32' buried radials, wish I could >reproduce that !... I think in your situation, I would swap that HF-6V for an automatic antenna tuner and then conceal that automatic antenna tuner at the base of that tree with a 24 foot wire running up the trunk. Snake a few radials among the rocks on the ground along with a ground rod and then let it rip. Don't worry about the radials not being straight. The tuner would automatically do a tune cycle when needed, you would have all bands, and very low visibility - even better than the HF-6V. I have an HF-6V also, and I know they work, but not really any better than a same-length wire with a tuner. Jerry W4UK _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: LONG: Background info on Re: WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V
|
|
In reply to this post by Niel Skousen-2
I was curious just what a CPK was, so I Googled it. I found this URL that would be a good read before you commit to the idea.
http://www.eham.net/forums/Elmers/10424 I had a Butternut HF5V about 18 years ago that was mounted with the base in a tripod on top of a beach house at about 28 feet. I used four 32 foot radials that sloped down to about 20 feet. The antenna worked very well and I worked 200 countries with it in a couple of years. However, the shack was hotter than a two dollar pistol with RF. Also, I was surrounded with salt water which helps a vertical to no end. The performance of any vertical depends greatly on both the near field grounding situation and the far field soil conductivity. The former affects the impedance of the load and the latter the radiation angle. Willis 'Cookie' Cooke K5EWJ --- On Wed, 8/20/08, Niel Skousen <[hidden email]> wrote: > From: Niel Skousen <[hidden email]> > Subject: [Elecraft] LONG: Background info on Re: WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V > To: "Elecraft Reflector" <[hidden email]>, [hidden email] > Cc: [hidden email] > Date: Wednesday, August 20, 2008, 8:59 AM > Hi Don (and all who have offered advice & help) > > Thanks to all for the input that has been offered. Based > on some of the > comments, I thought I might share the 'rest of the > story', both to seek > additional input, and to show the technical trade off's > associated with > a compromise antenna environment. > > I'm installing a used HF-6v in a CCR environment, so I > have some > environment limitations. The CCR 'enforcement' > committee is not > horribly aggressive, but if I don't aggravate the > situation, I'm much > better off. > > I have a 24' tree, with some 3-4' bushes at the > base, in a desert/rock > landscaped front yard. The back has no 'cover' > yet, and antenna's are > more visible in spite of a fence. The plan is to install > the antenna > obscured by the tree, in the front yard. Given the > landscaping, ground > mounted with a full radial system is not possible so > elevating the > antenna as high as possible without guys or objectionable > visibility > wash chosen. My last HF-6V had 32 ea 32' buried > radials, wish I could > reproduce that ! > > So, the HF6 will be mounted about 4' off the ground, a > full elevated > radial system is not possible. Choices seem to be the CPK > solution from > Butternut or a modified radial system. Two options are > being considered > on the modified radials. > > First, 3 tuned radials (either individual wires for 40/15, > 30, 20, 15,10 > or the Butternut tuned twinlead variety) could be connected > at the base > of the antenna, then run down (hidden in the bushes) at a > 60 degree > angle to ground level, then run under/around the rocks. > Performance is > expected to be better than the CPK, but still a compromise. > Routing is > not linear. Tuning of this radial environment is expected > to be a bear ! > > The second, the CPK, is expected to be enhanced by the low > elevation, > but NOT as effective as a good ground radial system. I > might be able to > enhance this configuration by laying out a psuedo radial > set of 6-10 8' > wires at the base of the 4' mast, which would more > accurately be a > surface capacitive element to enhance the CPK's effect. > > In neither case will the near field ground losses be > impacted. There > are some spiral wound counterpoise idea's out on the > web, as well as > some thoughts on constant angle spirals, which are > tempting, but at this > juncture, I expect to lean to the CPK to get it up and > running, with > spirals and experiments to follow... > > So any additional input, idea's, are solicited and > welcome > > Thanks again all, > > Niel > > > > Don Wilhelm wrote: > > Remember (or understand if you did not before) that > elevated radials > > should be tuned (pruned for length) just like a part > of the antenna > > (they *are* part of the antenna). > > > > So get out your antenna analyzer and cut one radial a > bit on the long > > side - attach only that one radial to the vertical and > shorten it until > > you have the correct readings on the antenna analyzer. > Cut the second > > radial to the same length - move to the next band and > do the same thing > > until you are done. Note that the radials can > interact on a multiband > > setup (just like parallel dipoles), so tune the lowest > bands first and > > move upward in frequency one band at a time. > > > > The twinlead solution does work, but suffers badly > from interaction. > > > > 73, > > Don W3FPR > > > > Jerry Flanders wrote: > >> At 04:54 PM 8/19/2008, Vic K2VCO wrote: > > >>> > >>> You don't need an expensive 'kit'! > Just take any old wire and make > >>> two 1/4 wavelength radials for each band -- a > total of 12 radials. > >>> Try to make them as symmetrical as possible, > with the two 40 meter > >>> radials opposite each other, etc. > >>> > >>> The ends of the radials must be > well-insulated, since even though > >>> they are connected to the coax braid at the > center, they will develop > >>> high-ish voltages at the ends. > >>> -- > >>> 73, > >>> Vic, K2VCO > >> > >> Details on making a multiband radial from > twin-lead are at: > >> http://www.bencher.com/pdfs/00366IZV.pdf > >> > >> Jerry W4UK > _______________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: [hidden email] > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: LONG: Background info on Re: WTB: CPK for Butternut HF-6V
|
|
In reply to this post by Niel Skousen-2
Niel,
Fine on your constraints. Remember that a vertical with raised radials is just a dipole 'on its side' with one leg (a single radial) bent at 90 degrees to the radiating element. So how does only the vertical part radiate you may ask. That happens because you add another radial physically opposite the first one, and the radiation of one radial is 180 degrees out of phase with the radiation from the other, so they cancel leaving only the vertical portion to radiate a signal. If the pair of radials are not symmetrical, then you may be just as well off with only a single radial per band. The radials must each be tuned (just like one end of a dipole) with the vertical radiator. The radials must be an *electrical* quarter wave long at the band of operation - they can be loaded with inductors near the junction with the coax shield, or they can be end loaded with a "T" wire, or some combination of both, but they must be resonant. If they are placed close to the ground (4 feet is close for the HF bands), there will be some effect from ground coupling that will de-tune them, so the easiest is to cut them long and do the trimming with the aid of an antenna analyzer (if there are several radials for each band, they must be tuned one at a time - connect only one and tune it, then connect only the next one and tune, etc. until done. Remember that the radials will not be 'radials' unless they are symmetrically placed around the vertical, it is of no use to run two radials for any one band out in the same direction for they will produce the same radiation pattern as a single radial. Another 'solution' is to trade that antenna for one that is an electrical half wave - which does not need radials being an antenna complete within itself. 73, Don W3FPR Niel Skousen wrote: > Hi Don (and all who have offered advice & help) > > Thanks to all for the input that has been offered. Based on some of the > comments, I thought I might share the 'rest of the story', both to seek > additional input, and to show the technical trade off's associated with > a compromise antenna environment. > > I'm installing a used HF-6v in a CCR environment, so I have some > environment limitations. The CCR 'enforcement' committee is not > horribly aggressive, but if I don't aggravate the situation, I'm much > better off. > > > So, the HF6 will be mounted about 4' off the ground, a full elevated > radial system is not possible. Choices seem to be the CPK solution from > Butternut or a modified radial system. Two options are being considered > on the modified radials. > > First, 3 tuned radials (either individual wires for 40/15, 30, 20, 15,10 > or the Butternut tuned twinlead variety) could be connected at the base > of the antenna, then run down (hidden in the bushes) at a 60 degree > angle to ground level, then run under/around the rocks. Performance is > expected to be better than the CPK, but still a compromise. Routing is > not linear. Tuning of this radial environment is expected to be a bear ! > > The second, the CPK, is expected to be enhanced by the low elevation, > but NOT as effective as a good ground radial system. I might be able to > enhance this configuration by laying out a psuedo radial set of 6-10 8' > wires at the base of the 4' mast, which would more accurately be a > surface capacitive element to enhance the CPK's effect. > > In neither case will the near field ground losses be impacted. There > are some spiral wound counterpoise idea's out on the web, as well as > some thoughts on constant angle spirals, which are tempting, but at this > juncture, I expect to lean to the CPK to get it up and running, with > spirals and experiments to follow... > > So any additional input, idea's, are solicited and welcome > > Thanks again all, > > Niel > > > > Don Wilhelm wrote: >> Remember (or understand if you did not before) that elevated radials >> should be tuned (pruned for length) just like a part of the antenna >> (they *are* part of the antenna). >> >> So get out your antenna analyzer and cut one radial a bit on the long >> side - attach only that one radial to the vertical and shorten it until >> you have the correct readings on the antenna analyzer. Cut the second >> radial to the same length - move to the next band and do the same thing >> until you are done. Note that the radials can interact on a multiband >> setup (just like parallel dipoles), so tune the lowest bands first and >> move upward in frequency one band at a time. >> >> The twinlead solution does work, but suffers badly from interaction. >> >> 73, >> Don W3FPR Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Hello Niel
I'd like to talgate Don's comments with a small one of my own. If you should use just a single radial, you may or not be able to see the little bit of directivity the antenna will develope in the direction of the single radial away from the vertical. I did a quick check with EZNEC on a 40m vertical with one radial. There is a 5 dB front-to-back ratio, with the best signal in the direction of the radial. The flip side of this is that the antenna gain is only -1.6dB in the favored direction, and even less in other directions. You might be able to take advantage of this, if your property is aligned in desireable directions. Good luck and 73 Bob N6WG ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Wilhelm" <[hidden email]> To: "Niel Skousen" <[hidden email]> Cc: <[hidden email]>; "Elecraft Reflector" <[hidden email]> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 1:29 PM Subject: [Elecraft] Re: LONG: Background info on Re: WTB: CPK for ButternutHF-6V > Niel, > > Fine on your constraints. > Remember that a vertical with raised radials is just a dipole 'on its > side' with one leg (a single radial) bent at 90 degrees to the radiating > element. > > So how does only the vertical part radiate you may ask. That happens > because you add another radial physically opposite the first one, and > the radiation of one radial is 180 degrees out of phase with the > radiation from the other, so they cancel leaving only the vertical > portion to radiate a signal. > > If the pair of radials are not symmetrical, then you may be just as well > off with only a single radial per band. > > The radials must each be tuned (just like one end of a dipole) with the > vertical radiator. The radials must be an *electrical* quarter wave > long at the band of operation - they can be loaded with inductors near > the junction with the coax shield, or they can be end loaded with a "T" > wire, or some combination of both, but they must be resonant. > If they are placed close to the ground (4 feet is close for the HF > bands), there will be some effect from ground coupling that will de-tune > them, so the easiest is to cut them long and do the trimming with the > aid of an antenna analyzer (if there are several radials for each band, > they must be tuned one at a time - connect only one and tune it, then > connect only the next one and tune, etc. until done. > > Remember that the radials will not be 'radials' unless they are > symmetrically placed around the vertical, it is of no use to run two > radials for any one band out in the same direction for they will produce > the same radiation pattern as a single radial. > > Another 'solution' is to trade that antenna for one that is an > electrical half wave - which does not need radials being an antenna > complete within itself. > > > 73, > Don W3FPR > > Niel Skousen wrote: > > Hi Don (and all who have offered advice & help) > > > > Thanks to all for the input that has been offered. Based on some > > comments, I thought I might share the 'rest of the story', both to seek > > additional input, and to show the technical trade off's associated with > > a compromise antenna environment. > > > > I'm installing a used HF-6v in a CCR environment, so I have some > > environment limitations. The CCR 'enforcement' committee is not > > horribly aggressive, but if I don't aggravate the situation, I'm much > > better off. > > > > > > So, the HF6 will be mounted about 4' off the ground, a full elevated > > radial system is not possible. Choices seem to be the CPK solution from > > Butternut or a modified radial system. Two options are being considered > > on the modified radials. > > > > First, 3 tuned radials (either individual wires for 40/15, 30, 20, 15,10 > > or the Butternut tuned twinlead variety) could be connected at the base > > of the antenna, then run down (hidden in the bushes) at a 60 degree > > angle to ground level, then run under/around the rocks. Performance is > > expected to be better than the CPK, but still a compromise. Routing is > > not linear. Tuning of this radial environment is expected to be a bear ! > > > > The second, the CPK, is expected to be enhanced by the low elevation, > > but NOT as effective as a good ground radial system. I might be able to > > enhance this configuration by laying out a psuedo radial set of 6-10 8' > > wires at the base of the 4' mast, which would more accurately be a > > surface capacitive element to enhance the CPK's effect. > > > > In neither case will the near field ground losses be impacted. There > > are some spiral wound counterpoise idea's out on the web, as well as > > some thoughts on constant angle spirals, which are tempting, but at this > > juncture, I expect to lean to the CPK to get it up and running, with > > spirals and experiments to follow... > > > > So any additional input, idea's, are solicited and welcome > > > > Thanks again all, > > > > Niel > > > > > > > > Don Wilhelm wrote: > >> Remember (or understand if you did not before) that elevated > >> should be tuned (pruned for length) just like a part of the antenna > >> (they *are* part of the antenna). > >> > >> So get out your antenna analyzer and cut one radial a bit on the long > >> side - attach only that one radial to the vertical and shorten it until > >> you have the correct readings on the antenna analyzer. Cut the second > >> radial to the same length - move to the next band and do the same thing > >> until you are done. Note that the radials can interact on a multiband > >> setup (just like parallel dipoles), so tune the lowest bands first and > >> move upward in frequency one band at a time. > >> > >> The twinlead solution does work, but suffers badly from interaction. > >> > >> 73, > >> Don W3FPR > _______________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: [hidden email] > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |