Originally posted by Breitling
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
best antenna
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by 1090 MHz View PostLike the one I built... 8 and a half elements was based on a HAM 70cm band antenna design.
http://ads-b.ca/antenna-collinear-F-CYYZ2/img_9712.htm
Maybe the corrugated shape of the shield in Andrew-Heliax cable is a factor in it's excellent performance, as pointed out by SBSer in his post #1304
Comment
-
I have loads of the Andrew-Heliax LDF1-50 if anyone want some. They rewired the CYYZ 15L Glide-Path and this was the old cable. All of it was in good working order when removed from service.
glidepath15L.jpg
Photo courtesy Alex
Comment
-
1090,
Your 8 1/2 version... on the photo you posted, what infor and specs can you share on the 1/4 sleeve balun? What is your dimensions on the top element/section? Seem like 8 x 1/2 waves + 1 x 1/4 wave + protruding stub. you welcome to take this off forum, as I feel it might cause unwanted clutter. You can reach me on: fakm [@] eons [dot] co [dot] za
ABCD,
I will add another 2 elements to bring it to 8 in total. Current 6 element gives a meager 150km coverage. As it's currently at 5m above ground, I might be hitting the radio horizon (its not high up, as to have it easily accessible for modifications), that I base on the shape of the plot. Time to visit it again with a volt meter to test for shorts or bad connections, and add the elements.
I'm thinking of doing another experiment:
Use 1/2" copper tubing with a centre core of a copper rod, space the inner in the outer with rubber washers or a good dab of hot glue to keep the two parts evenly spaced and separated. Base it on ABCD's new dimensions, make it a 4 element. Thinking that having a more solid material (based on 1090's Super Antenna) will give better reception. Using this kind of material will result in a perfect straight antenna (no kinks due to soft cable). However, in a case like this, what VF should I assume to base the element lengths on?
Looking at both ABCD and 1090's photo's, I can only assume I mess up at the very bottom of the antenna, as I construct the antenna elements, then directly insert the feed cable into the lower element, where both of you have either a balun or a short piece of cable followed by a connector and then the feedline.Last edited by HermanZA; 2014-07-24, 08:59.
Comment
-
Originally posted by HermanZA View Post1090,
Your 8 1/2 version... on the photo you posted, what infor and specs can you share on the 1/4 sleeve balun? What is your dimensions on the top element/section? Seem like 8 x 1/2 waves + 1 x 1/4 wave + protruding stub. you welcome to take this off forum, as I feel it might cause unwanted clutter. You can reach me on: fakm [at] eons .dot. co .dot. za
The top is a 1/4 & 1/4 that's shorted at the center.
The sleeve is made or 1/2 inch copper pipe.
Since the antenna that was in this case before was a 2400 MHz I extended the sleeve to now match 1090 MHz
Sleeve is none VF adjusted.
The antenna was tested by a Nav Canada Engineer using their test equipment. He said the antenna peeked slightly above 1090 MHz but was so close it was within their standards and that he would certify it for an actual ATC use. The antennas bandwidth also extended it higher above 1100MHz making it also a good DME antenna.
While we were at it we also tested the FR24 provided antenna and it also had good results but a wider bandwidth also including the 987 MHz UAT frequency.Last edited by 1090 MHz; 2014-07-24, 09:16.
Comment
-
Originally posted by HermanZA View Post....Current 6 element gives a meager 150km coverage. As it's currently at 5m above ground, I might be hitting the radio horizon (its not high up, as to have it easily accessible for modifications), ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by HermanZA View Post......I'm thinking of doing another experiment:
Use 1/2" copper tubing with a centre core of a copper rod, space the inner in the outer with rubber washers or a good dab of hot glue to keep the two parts evenly spaced and separated. Base it on ABCD's new dimensions, make it a 4 element. Thinking that having a more solid material (based on 1090's Super Antenna) will give better reception. Using this kind of material will result in a perfect straight antenna (no kinks due to soft cable). However, in a case like this, what VF should I assume to base the element lengths on?
Looking at both ABCD and 1090's photo's, I can only assume I mess up at the very bottom of the antenna, as I construct the antenna elements, then directly insert the feed cable into the lower element, where both of you have either a balun or a short piece of cable followed by a connector and then the feedline.
element length (conventional formula) = 1/2 x wavelength x VF = 1/2 x 275 x 1 = 137.5 mm
element length (new formula) = wavelength x VF/(1+VF) = 275 x 1/(1+1) = 275 x 1/2 = 137.5 mm
(2) It is same weather the feeder is connected directly to bottom element of antenna, or through a short piece of cable with connector. I used short piece & connector only for the reason that I can easily interchange various antennas at connector point. All my antennas (all CoCos, Franklin, 1/2 wave dipole, & sleeved dipoles) have this short piece & connector. The connector & short piece are not part of antenna. These form part of the feed cable.
Comment
-
Originally posted by abcd567 View PostNow this is a conflicting situation. I get excellent results, while HermanZA gets not very good results. We need few more volunteers to run the test to be sure. Any volunteers?
I made an 8 element coco today with 124mm segments. Results are not good, less than 50nm. However, I don't know what type of coax I have. It is stamped sat100 CE F.B.E. Neither the core or braid are magnetic. From previous experiments I think the coax is PTFE so I'll make another two at 109mm and 116mm.
I'll be back in a couple of days.T-EGUB1
Comment
-
My current antenna testing setup is on the roof of my building at work. Only about 20feet high and severely obstructed to the north and east. But, it is an easy place to walk up to the reciever and swap out antenna.
I have tried various designs of the coliniear antennas on this thread and have not gotten any of them to work any better than a 1/2 wave dipole.
With the 1/2 wave I would get (from this location) reports from aircraft up to about 80 nm away and would regularly see 10 to 15 aircraft at a time during the day.
Today I constructed a simple Jpole antenna and put it up. WOW! Consistently picking up planes 200 nm to the southwest .. and normally tracking 25 to 35 planes at a time.
So far the J pole is the best antenna that I have tried. I guess after a few days trial on this... I will try making a Franklin or ZEP (modified J poles)
Once the best antenna is built.. I can raise it up over most of the obstructions :-)
Comment
-
Originally posted by HermanZA View PostCare to share some of your J-pole design specs with us?
I used an online jpole calculator..
Made it out of a single lenght of wire....
Long side is 198mm ... bottom of the "U" is 6mm .. short side is 64mm..
Coax shield is soldlered to the short side, center conductor to the long side.. both soldered 6mm up from the bottom "U".
One thing that is so nice about playing with these antenna is that at 1090 mhz they are so small :-)
My "mast" is a chopstick that I have taped to an electrical box on the roof :-)
Edit to add a photo....
10509555_10202353174856226_9164666149484058835_n.jpgLast edited by tvengineer; 2014-07-24, 22:39.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tvengineer View PostMy current antenna testing setup is on the roof of my building at work. Only about 20feet high and severely obstructed to the north and east. But, it is an easy place to walk up to the reciever and swap out antenna.
I have tried various designs of the coliniear antennas on this thread and have not gotten any of them to work any better than a 1/2 wave dipole.
With the 1/2 wave I would get (from this location) reports from aircraft up to about 80 nm away and would regularly see 10 to 15 aircraft at a time during the day.
Today I constructed a simple Jpole antenna and put it up. WOW! Consistently picking up planes 200 nm to the southwest .. and normally tracking 25 to 35 planes at a time.
So far the J pole is the best antenna that I have tried. I guess after a few days trial on this... I will try making a Franklin or ZEP (modified J poles)
Once the best antenna is built.. I can raise it up over most of the obstructions :-)
(1) It has an impedance of 75 ohms, so SWR = 1 for a 75 ohm receiver / cable. Its gain is though low (2.11 dBi).
(2) Its simplicity makes it's accurate cutting / fabrication very easy even for a novice.
Of all the antennas I have tried up to now, ALL my CoCos (total 5) with element length = 1/2 wavelength x VF have proved hopeless. The best is 4 element Franklin with matching stub. Other antennas like 1/2 wave dipole, 1/2 wave sleeved dipole, and 124mm 4-element CoCo are reasonably good, but less than Franklin.Last edited by abcd567; 2014-07-25, 00:03.
Comment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by trigger View PostI volunteer !!
I made an 8 element coco today with 124mm segments. Results are not good, less than 50nm. However, I don't know what type of coax I have. It is stamped sat100 CE F.B.E. Neither the core or braid are magnetic. From previous experiments I think the coax is PTFE so I'll make another two at 109mm and 116mm.
I'll be back in a couple of days.
Comment
-
Originally posted by trigger View PostI volunteer !!
I made an 8 element coco today with 124mm segments. Results are not good, less than 50nm. However, I don't know what type of coax I have. It is stamped sat100 CE F.B.E. Neither the core or braid are magnetic. From previous experiments I think the coax is PTFE so I'll make another two at 109mm and 116mm.
I'll be back in a couple of days.
Comment
Comment