It seems your antennas were fairly close to eachother. I suspect you had serious interaction on the 3 horizontal polarized wires in addition to common mode currents floating RF on coax lines. Interaction could seriously distort antenna patterns while causing radiation from all 3 antennas at the same time regardless of which was connected to the radio. Proper comparisons would be more effective with antennas 7 to 10 wavelengths apart. The power lines nearby can also distort patterns and affect your efforts. Many hams do comparison tests with antennas that are too close causing erroneous results. NE2Q
Unfortunately signals reflecting off the ionosphere are very dynamic. They change in polarization and strength, and because of this even the same signal from the same antenna will change second by second. People who use WSJT for FT8 or similar modes can easily see how the strength of any particular station will generally change from one transmission to the next. The other factor is of course that these antennas will have different radiation patterns where each may favor certain directions and/or distances. Nevertheless, no antenna in the test showed up as a clear failure or dummy load. And who knows, with enough tests and experimentation it might be possible to formulate some sort of conclusion.
Good test. It is extremely difficult to get good results.I find that the signal level on any one antenna varies with the QSB so much that I have to get a high and a low value for one antenna and a high and low value for the other antenna over a period of several minutes. Alternating from one antenna to the other. I was recently comparing a dipole and a vertical on 40. The dipole was always peaking 5 or so dB above the vertical. However once there was almost no difference. 30 years ago I did a similar test with a big vertical, horizontal and a mobile antenna. I kept checking all day and into the evening with the Canadian CHU time station on 7.335. There were times of the day that the vertical was dominant and times the horizontal was dominant. Obviously the vertical on my salt marsh had a pretty good low angle whereas the horizontal had a much higher radiation angle as it was not “high” on 40 meters. I can’t remember the details but still have the readings somewhere! I like the RBN. 73 DE N4DJ
I as well like the simplicity of a dipole. At the moment I am receiving only on my Kenwood Ts-520.. my antenna is a 100’ household electrical extension cord, it works quite well to receive with. No, none,nada, intentions to transmit with.. just listening. It is why I stopped by your video today.. to get that comparison between types of antennas. Thanks.
It appears that you are showing us some really interesting technology. It is hard to understand you with the noise in the background, which sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Perhaps a Lavalier mic would allow you to have better sound quality. Thank you for sharing, 73
Jonathan, I really like the stand that you are using to support your antenna mast. Do you have a plan that you could share with me? Thanks in advance. 73 George KB3WAQ
They are just 2x4 stands we throw together for field day. Check the video I did on our field day as K4NN. You will see us put it together. Super cheap and super easy.
They are fiberglass poles. They work really well, especially if you have a radiating vertical wire or coax. I use them for Field Day supports. The one I used here is 7 - 6 foot sections so it needs to be guyed well. The one I used in Nicaragua as YN1N is 8 - 4 foot sections. That one is a bit stiffer....hardly needs guying....but I feel safer guying it. ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
Are you thinking of the linked vertical... That is 33 feet...works for 40, 20, 15, 10. It is a very lightweight fiberglass. I much prefer the 12 meter mast sold by viberplex made by spiderbeam. I used it in this video for the PA QSO party..... ua-cam.com/video/Dvy5dK9ah2g/v-deo.html.... I also learned since this video that it is better to shorten the doublet to 110 feet instead of 133 feet to make it easier to tune.... I certainly am not an expert.... I learn as I go.
@@radionb3i yes, thanks, the linked vertical. I am looking at the spider mast too but I am concerned there is too much sway to support a lightweight balun for an inverted vee. Any insight you might have would be appreciated. 73s de N0SL, Ron
@@ronm6359 Fiberglass is nice if you are using twin lead or a vertical wire...if you are using coax we prefer 6 foot telescoping Aluminium tubes. If you watch my field day videos you see what we do for field day. We get them up to 55 feet . They are also cheaper I think. Buy it from Texas tower or dx engineering.
I had a good time. I did need to clear my radios through customs which took 6 hours and a 200 dollars. I made a little video of that experience. Here is the link: ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
Wonderful research ... particularly for a Wire Antenna's .. Yagi's group are Good but Awkward and Expensive besides it need a Ranch and Tower ... To be honest with you .. what i am dream of is a Wire Antenna i can erect in my backyard (Let say less than 50 feet space ) But it is Very good in Receive mode and able to detect the QRP signals coming from DX overseas station against that huge background noise .. For me .. i am not worry that much in Transmit mode ... because i can compensate the (Less efficiency / Out of band) of TX Antenna's simply with a (Tuner) and Little push in TX power * (* assuming it have a low beam angle , like verticals) ... i wished you joined T2FD Antenna to this tournament because (i heard) it has a Outstanding Receiving Characteristic ** , Perhaps that's why they have been produced commercially in many known hierarchy Brands such Codan and Diamond (** Correct me if i am wrong ..)
that was a really tall pole you put up at 4:24 what were you using to do that? and at 5:32 you have some sort of grey pipe with black fittings thats pretty bendy.
At 4:24 it is an aluminum pole...Actually a homemade 67 foot vertical...but I just use the bottom 43 feet for FD....put a wood stick in the top to carry the center of a dipole. The other is Fiberglass...They are 6 foot sections and that also works well for fd... It is important to use with this EFHW antenna because it has a vertical radiator. At 43 feet it is pretty flexible but with guy ropes it is very strong. I use the 8 sections of a 4 foot fiberglass pole more often because it travel easier. That one is considerable stiffer but I still guy it. With a eight foot 2.4 base it still gets me to 36 feet. Here is the link my use of that pole.... ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
Excellent video, I have a question; In your (and most videos I see,) people often use an antenna switch box. In it, the coax connection side of the antennas are shared all the time between the various antennas, and you just switch the main radiator of the antenna around with in the switch box. Do you find any difference in not having the switch box in line and having a stand alone antenna each time, and keeping the antenna's separated? Or does having all those extra shared coax shield connections change the antenna's operation any? I just look at things a bit differently from an electrician's view point; example; a ground plane plus a DI-pole sharing the same coax shield connection. Does it affect the system any? It's just a question I have never seen a video on and was curious about. Great video.
It just seems to me a ground plane's counterpoise plus one half of a DI-pole have to interact in some way to change the desired antenna system's design.
All the antennas share a common ground. I am not a very technical person..... I just know it works. I am sure other's above my pay grade can answer this question better. Ask Stan: ua-cam.com/channels/BkyowYDOIQJEW638Zrg42g.html He will make a presentation on this answer.
I decided to take the dipole to Nicaragua. I had a good time. Here is the link to the video of that experience. ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html Thanks for watching.
So you do a antenna comparison on hf with all the inherent fading and differing angles of radiation as well as different time slots of each antenna and then you found the results were inconclusive? I could have saved you a lot of work and told you that as soon as you explained what you test method was going to be
Yes, I'm sure. It's a hobby. I just do it for the fun of it. I never set up different antennas before to run at the same time. I will take the dipole to Nicaragua in February operating as YN1N. Hope to work you in the contest.
When you model those antennas.... On the harmonics they have totally different radiation patterns so you can expect different results between them. Only on the fundamental will the patterns be the similar. Sorry.
Interesting, That might explain the kind of erratic inconsistencies I felt I experienced. I must admit I was totally surprised that the End Fed reduced and almost eliminated a sporadic line noise I experience between the hours of 8 and 10 on 80 meters. My friend says the toroids he wraps the coax with at the end of the vertical radiator helps eliminate this noise. Do you have an explanation for this? My only trouble with the end fed is that it tends to rely on tuners which I tend to avoid. The dipole is so easy to tune perfectly for my purposes. You might enjoy this little video I made on our trip to Nicaragua. ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
@@radionb3i End Fed antennas don't require tuners if you carefully trim them to resonance, just like dipoles. If you are not careful then what you have is going to need a tuner, much like a random wire antenna.
+1 to Steve's comment. If you have the space to deploy more than 1 antenna per band there can be benefits, just as you demonstrated, due to differences in radiation pattern and take off angle.
Thanks for the great effort to set it all up. On FT8 mode a bit like jt65 but narrower band width I think they gauge signals in minus db and the less the number the stronger is the rx signal. It sure is hard to determine what works best I have tried several antennas on SOTA but these days settled on a link dipole most of the time. I have however made a summit 2 summit with Spain Germany Austria using a 58 foot end fed wire 9 feet counter poise on my kx3 and a summit 2 summit to usa on a dipole. I live in vk5 and enjoy watching all kind of ham radio on You Tube thanks for posting regards vk5cz ..
It appears that you are showing us some really interesting technology. It is hard to understand you with the noise in the background, which sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Perhaps a Lavalier mic would allow you to have better sound quality. Thank you for sharing, 73
Hey guys, he’s making a video.
Get out the leaf blower!
End fed half waves are easy to setup and fed easy on one end.
That was awesome watching you guys getting those masts up so fast and easy A+
As long as my antennas are resident on 20m and 40m, I'm a happy guy. Thanks for the comparison.
did you mean "resonant"?
It seems your antennas were fairly close to eachother. I suspect you had serious interaction on the 3 horizontal polarized wires in addition to common mode currents floating RF on coax lines.
Interaction could seriously distort antenna patterns while causing radiation from all 3 antennas at the same time regardless of which was connected to the radio.
Proper comparisons would be more effective with antennas 7 to 10 wavelengths apart.
The power lines nearby can also distort patterns and affect your efforts.
Many hams do comparison tests with antennas that are too close causing erroneous results.
NE2Q
Unfortunately signals reflecting off the ionosphere are very dynamic. They change in polarization and strength, and because of this even the same signal from the same antenna will change second by second. People who use WSJT for FT8 or similar modes can easily see how the strength of any particular station will generally change from one transmission to the next. The other factor is of course that these antennas will have different radiation patterns where each may favor certain directions and/or distances. Nevertheless, no antenna in the test showed up as a clear failure or dummy load. And who knows, with enough tests and experimentation it might be possible to formulate some sort of conclusion.
Good test. It is extremely difficult to get good results.I find that the signal level on any one antenna varies with the QSB so much that I have to get a high and a low value for one antenna and a high and low value for the other antenna over a period of several minutes. Alternating from one antenna to the other. I was recently comparing a dipole and a vertical on 40. The dipole was always peaking 5 or so dB above the vertical. However once there was almost no difference. 30 years ago I did a similar test with a big vertical, horizontal and a mobile antenna. I kept checking all day and into the evening with the Canadian CHU time station on 7.335. There were times of the day that the vertical was dominant and times the horizontal was dominant. Obviously the vertical on my salt marsh had a pretty good low angle whereas the horizontal had a much higher radiation angle as it was not “high” on 40 meters. I can’t remember the details but still have the readings somewhere! I like the RBN.
73 DE N4DJ
That was very interesting, personally I like the simplicity of the dipole.
I as well like the simplicity of a dipole. At the moment I am receiving only on my Kenwood Ts-520.. my antenna is a 100’ household electrical extension cord, it works quite well to receive with. No, none,nada, intentions to transmit with.. just listening. It is why I stopped by your video today.. to get that comparison between types of antennas. Thanks.
I think you should remake the video when nobody is running a gas blower outside your ham room. The noise is quite distracting.
It appears that you are showing us some really interesting technology. It is hard to understand you with the noise in the background, which sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Perhaps a Lavalier mic would allow you to have better sound quality. Thank you for sharing,
73
the vacuum cleaner is a nice touch. btw, do you know N2GQ from your area? looks like his license has been allowed to expire after 40 some years.
Thanks for the interesting video. Do you happen to have the link to the website where someone can see their received signals by other hams??
www.reversebeacon.net/
Jonathan,
I really like the stand that you are using to support your antenna mast. Do you have a plan that you could share with me?
Thanks in advance. 73 George KB3WAQ
They are just 2x4 stands we throw together for field day. Check the video I did on our field day as K4NN. You will see us put it together. Super cheap and super easy.
Give it another try some day using WSPR. Much better way to compare antennas.
for the EFHW did you use a ground rod or counterpoise? at home i use an 8' ground rod and portable i use a 4' rod. it does help .
We used a 4 ft. ground rod.
Hi Jonathan,
Very good video. What material are the grey masts? 73 WB3BJU
They are fiberglass poles. They work really well, especially if you have a radiating vertical wire or coax. I use them for Field Day supports. The one I used here is 7 - 6 foot sections so it needs to be guyed well. The one I used in Nicaragua as YN1N is 8 - 4 foot sections. That one is a bit stiffer....hardly needs guying....but I feel safer guying it. ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
Great video thanks but sticking with my end fed until I can get a beam up ,new subscriber now 👍👍
What material was used for the first mast with the linked dipole? And how high was it?
Are you thinking of the linked vertical... That is 33 feet...works for 40, 20, 15, 10. It is a very lightweight fiberglass. I much prefer the 12 meter mast sold by viberplex made by spiderbeam. I used it in this video for the PA QSO party..... ua-cam.com/video/Dvy5dK9ah2g/v-deo.html.... I also learned since this video that it is better to shorten the doublet to 110 feet instead of 133 feet to make it easier to tune.... I certainly am not an expert.... I learn as I go.
@@radionb3i yes, thanks, the linked vertical. I am looking at the spider mast too but I am concerned there is too much sway to support a lightweight balun for an inverted vee. Any insight you might have would be appreciated. 73s de N0SL, Ron
@@ronm6359 Fiberglass is nice if you are using twin lead or a vertical wire...if you are using coax we prefer 6 foot telescoping Aluminium tubes. If you watch my field day videos you see what we do for field day. We get them up to 55 feet . They are also cheaper I think. Buy it from Texas tower or dx engineering.
That EF looks like an Ultimax 100
Good (hard) work and excellent video. I'll have to try the reverse beacon network. Thanks de n0wdm
hi there! i am from nicaragua and travel a lot but never try to bring radios how was the process for you?
I had a good time. I did need to clear my radios through customs which took 6 hours and a 200 dollars. I made a little video of that experience. Here is the link: ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
Wonderful research ... particularly for a Wire Antenna's ..
Yagi's group are Good but Awkward and Expensive besides it need a Ranch and Tower ...
To be honest with you .. what i am dream of is a Wire Antenna i can erect in my backyard (Let say less than 50 feet space ) But it is Very good in Receive mode and able to detect the QRP signals coming from DX overseas station against that huge background noise ..
For me .. i am not worry that much in Transmit mode ... because i can compensate the (Less efficiency / Out of band) of TX Antenna's simply with a (Tuner) and Little push in TX power *
(* assuming it have a low beam angle , like verticals) ...
i wished you joined T2FD Antenna to this tournament because (i heard) it has a Outstanding Receiving Characteristic ** , Perhaps that's why they have been produced commercially in many known hierarchy Brands such Codan and Diamond
(** Correct me if i am wrong ..)
that was a really tall pole you put up at 4:24 what were you using to do that? and at 5:32 you have some sort of grey pipe with black fittings thats pretty bendy.
At 4:24 it is an aluminum pole...Actually a homemade 67 foot vertical...but I just use the bottom 43 feet for FD....put a wood stick in the top to carry the center of a dipole. The other is Fiberglass...They are 6 foot sections and that also works well for fd... It is important to use with this EFHW antenna because it has a vertical radiator. At 43 feet it is pretty flexible but with guy ropes it is very strong. I use the 8 sections of a 4 foot fiberglass pole more often because it travel easier. That one is considerable stiffer but I still guy it. With a eight foot 2.4 base it still gets me to 36 feet. Here is the link my use of that pole.... ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
Excellent video, I have a question; In your (and most videos I see,) people often use an antenna switch box. In it, the coax connection side of the antennas are shared all the time between the various antennas, and you just switch the main radiator of the antenna around with in the switch box. Do you find any difference in not having the switch box in line and having a stand alone antenna each time, and keeping the antenna's separated? Or does having all those extra shared coax shield connections change the antenna's operation any? I just look at things a bit differently from an electrician's view point; example; a ground plane plus a DI-pole sharing the same coax shield connection. Does it affect the system any? It's just a question I have never seen a video on and was curious about. Great video.
It just seems to me a ground plane's counterpoise plus one half of a DI-pole have to interact in some way to change the desired antenna system's design.
All the antennas share a common ground. I am not a very technical person..... I just know it works. I am sure other's above my pay grade can answer this question better. Ask Stan: ua-cam.com/channels/BkyowYDOIQJEW638Zrg42g.html He will make a presentation on this answer.
Good job, and while inclusive the important thing is to use the antenna you have! how did they work out? KD0PBZ
I decided to take the dipole to Nicaragua. I had a good time. Here is the link to the video of that experience. ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html Thanks for watching.
Any details on your little mortar used to launch wires into trees?
I copied W2GT design in this video. I just made it straight with a removable barrel. It works great. ua-cam.com/video/eagrh9v_H78/v-deo.html
TRY A QUAD ANTENNA ?
So you do a antenna comparison on hf with all the inherent fading and differing angles of radiation as well as different time slots of each antenna and then you found the results were inconclusive? I could have saved you a lot of work and told you that as soon as you explained what you test method was going to be
Yes, I'm sure. It's a hobby. I just do it for the fun of it. I never set up different antennas before to run at the same time. I will take the dipole to Nicaragua in February operating as YN1N. Hope to work you in the contest.
A la vertical le faltan los radiales d tierra, son 6 DBS más.
Nice job, guys! --73, Rus, K2UA
Thanks for the comparing test! 73 de DK2,HM
Nice video
Furthermore the dipole is directional, while the two verticals are 360 degrees radiators, pus they all have different elevation angles.
using RBN is a waste. Use the various WEBSDR receivers around to compare signals
When you model those antennas.... On the harmonics they have totally different radiation patterns so you can expect different results between them. Only on the fundamental will the patterns be the similar. Sorry.
Interesting, That might explain the kind of erratic inconsistencies I felt I experienced. I must admit I was totally surprised that the End Fed reduced and almost eliminated a sporadic line noise I experience between the hours of 8 and 10 on 80 meters. My friend says the toroids he wraps the coax with at the end of the vertical radiator helps eliminate this noise. Do you have an explanation for this? My only trouble with the end fed is that it tends to rely on tuners which I tend to avoid. The dipole is so easy to tune perfectly for my purposes. You might enjoy this little video I made on our trip to Nicaragua. ua-cam.com/video/hOCImHS6qFA/v-deo.html
@@radionb3i End Fed antennas don't require tuners if you carefully trim them to resonance, just like dipoles. If you are not careful then what you have is going to need a tuner, much like a random wire antenna.
+1 to Steve's comment. If you have the space to deploy more than 1 antenna per band there can be benefits, just as you demonstrated, due to differences in radiation pattern and take off angle.
Dipole would be my choice, less noise, solid horizonal signal.
My choice as well
Thanks for the great effort to set it all up. On FT8 mode a bit like jt65 but narrower band width I think they gauge signals in minus db and the less the number the stronger is the rx signal. It sure is hard to determine what works best I have tried several antennas on SOTA but these days settled on a link dipole most of the time. I have however made a summit 2 summit with Spain Germany Austria using a 58 foot end fed wire 9 feet counter poise on my kx3 and a summit 2 summit to usa on a dipole. I live in vk5 and enjoy watching all kind of ham radio on You Tube thanks for posting regards vk5cz ..
It appears that you are showing us some really interesting technology. It is hard to understand you with the noise in the background, which sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Perhaps a Lavalier mic would allow you to have better sound quality. Thank you for sharing,
73