Marconi tests Shockwave's Antenna Interaction Idea

[Marconi]

Here are three videos taken this date with my Sigma4 and my Marconi7x co-phase connected...using the random feed lines attached to a T-connector and connected to my switch box.

The purpose of this test was only to try and confirm or deny any interaction with these antennas mounted 35' feet apart at my location by using SW's idea. I won't try and paraphrase Shockwave's idea here, his own words are noted elsewhere on this forum and I think it is in this thread.

We both agree that the idea is not intended to suggest the manner of co-phasing or it function. Try this at your own risk.

YouTube - Marconi Testing Co-Phased Base Antennas Video 1

YouTube - Marconi Testing Co-Phased Base Antennas Video 2

YouTube - Marconi Testing Co-Phased Antennas Video 3

This morning there was not much traffic on my home channel. I feel it important to know the locations of the stations under this test in order to try and determine any differences note between the co-phase setup and regular operations. With on a few contacts working, I feel the tests were insufficient to my making a simple judgment, because direction is important to these results...and there just weren't enough sample opportunities.

However, I do think the reports may be of some use.

 

[Marconi]

Frank I did the test again today and did a couple of videos to capture the experience, but they don't tell me a thing except for the principals noted for two co-phased antennas. As noted earlier I was using random feed lines only...no co-p-cophase harness. I just connected my 91' foot LMR 400 to my Marconi and 54' foot RG8/u to a T-connector to my switch box, and then switched back and forth.

My antennas are positioned north and south and I saw signals increase to the east and west and nulled a bit to the north and south, just what I would expect. I suspect the random nature of the two feed lines may have been close, so I was just seeing more or less a traditional pattern. I saw nothing special to be noted.

My match with the C/P setup was right at 2.00:1 as best I can tell, but was probably higher in reality. My tuner handled the issue fine, but as we both would note*****others should not try this without some risk to their radios.

I don't know yet what I should be look for in particular, but I'll try it again. All it did this morning was get a fight started as soon as I started talking to a guy West of me that I was seeing a nice increase from compared to his regular signal. I was breaking the rules of the air today and Saturdays are always the worst day to break the rules.

 

[HomerBB]

. . . All it did this morning was get a fight started as soon as I started talking to a guy West of me that I was seeing a nice increase from compared to his regular signal. I was breaking the rules of the air today and Saturdays are always the worst day to break the rules.

Musta been a (blank) operator.

 

[Marconi]

Musta been a (blank) operator.

Yep Homer, the monkey fell of his front poarch and starting jumping up and down...like a monkey with a COCA-NUT. I have it on video, but it's too long to upload to YouTube so I won't be publishing the sideshow.

I was trying to test the co-phased idea that Shockwave told us would show interaction of my antennas at 36' feet apart. I saw interaction just as it should be for antennas positioned South to North. Most signals NE,N,NW,S showed very little difference, with the best showing a 2 Sunit drop on switching. Two stations to the West showed a nice increase on my end, and both the other operators said they saw nice signals, but additional comments were blocked by the Monkey. One of the operators is a member of this forum, Chris 443. He might come on if he realized anything. Another signal to the broadside of my antennas and to the East, I just couldn't explain what was going on well enough. He didn't understand what I was talking about, I don't think he knew where the West was.

Maybe SW will chime in with some info. I sent him my video link so he could try and analyze it. Maybe he saw something. Just another test gone by, with no real results other than what would be expected. I'm not sure I even know what I would see if the test told me the antennas were not interacting together.

"Buy em' books, send em' to school,
and all they do is eat the covers."​

 

[HomerBB]

And you afterward removed one antenna for a while, and then switched over to the other antenna removing the first?

I think I understood the idea was

antenna A - - - -- - -- - -- B antenna

then B - - - --- - -- - -- A
then A only, and B only, but I am not too sure.

 

[MrSuburban]

All that test did was to add more confusion to the mix. How can Shockwave analzye a video and give you reports on what happened sorry i like Shockwave but he isn't kreskin he has no idea who is talking where they are located what direction they are from you, what antenna side were they favoring, nothing nothing nothing can be determined by a 3rd party looking at a video of a radio with a bar graph meter, 91' of coax and 54' of coax and I hope he doesnt say he somehow can. End of Rant

 

[HomerBB]

 

[Shockwave]

In retrospect this was not the right way to show near field interaction between two antennas. I should have stuck with the idea of precisely measuring the reflected power or analyzer readings as the second antenna was installed. Any change here is a much better indication of near field parasitic interaction. Sometimes shorting the end of the coax on the passive antenna can reveal things here that might be overlooked. Like the ability to increase reflected power on the active antenna. Sorry for the confusion. I just remember experimenting with this as a kid and seeing some very unusual patterns. Likely the result of the particular phase angles and distances in my installation.