You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

If northern35 got different readings than you; then perhaps he needed to play with the tuning rings on it until he found the sweet spot. After all, those rings are on that for that expressed purpose of tuning the antenna. Maybe he didn't bother or there was something wrong with the antenna/needed a'fixin.

I trust your readings were correct and your method looked sound.

The EFHW was designed to come up with all of the right readings; but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is as efficient as it could be when real power is applied to it. In the real world using it, it would have to use a piece of coax to transmit with - of course. It would use the shield of the coax as a ground plane; but we already know this.

Kinda like what DB said on a similar thread a couple of weeks ago. Any antenna wants to behave like a dipole, as it will need some type of return path. Pardon my paraphrase; but this is so. There are exceptions - of course ('J-pole').

Wasn't northern35 supposed to document the difference between what you did and then adding the required ground planes, coax choke, and insulate the mast by using a fiberglass pole 1/4 wavelength long and then compare; or did I miss something?

<blockquote data-quote="Robb" data-source="post: 437559" data-attributes="member: 8446">If northern35 got different readings than you; then perhaps he needed to play with the tuning rings on it until he found the sweet spot.&nbsp; After all, those rings are on that for that expressed purpose of tuning the antenna.&nbsp; Maybe he didn&#039;t bother or there was something wrong with the antenna/needed a&#039;fixin.I trust your readings were correct and your method looked sound.&nbsp; The EFHW was designed to come up with all of the right readings; but that doesn&#039;t necessarily mean that it is as efficient as it could be when real power is applied to it.&nbsp; In the real world using it, it would have to use a piece of coax to transmit with - of course.&nbsp; It would use the shield of the coax as a ground plane; but we already know this.&nbsp; Kinda like what DB said on a similar thread a couple of weeks ago.&nbsp;&nbsp; Any antenna wants to behave like a dipole, as it will need some type of return path.&nbsp; Pardon my paraphrase; but this is so.&nbsp; There are exceptions - of course (&#039;J-pole&#039;).&nbsp; Wasn&#039;t northern35 supposed to document the difference between what you did and then adding the required ground planes, coax choke, and insulate the mast by using a fiberglass pole 1/4 wavelength long and then compare; or did I miss something?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Robb, post: 437559, member: 8446"] If northern35 got different readings than you; then perhaps he needed to play with the tuning rings on it until he found the sweet spot. After all, those rings are on that for that expressed purpose of tuning the antenna. Maybe he didn't bother or there was something wrong with the antenna/needed a'fixin. I trust your readings were correct and your method looked sound. The EFHW was designed to come up with all of the right readings; but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is as efficient as it could be when real power is applied to it. In the real world using it, it would have to use a piece of coax to transmit with - of course. It would use the shield of the coax as a ground plane; but we already know this. Kinda like what DB said on a similar thread a couple of weeks ago. Any antenna wants to behave like a dipole, as it will need some type of return path. Pardon my paraphrase; but this is so. There are exceptions - of course ('J-pole'). Wasn't northern35 supposed to document the difference between what you did and then adding the required ground planes, coax choke, and insulate the mast by using a fiberglass pole 1/4 wavelength long and then compare; or did I miss something? [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom