Marcius interesting antena ..how far away is the feeder from the radiator? what feeder do you use?
-
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.
Modified Vector 4000
- Thread starter bob85
- Start date
I've built one of these before, on the CB band no less. Mounted it on a rope that went between a tree and a telephone pole. I think I still have the wire for it in my basement...
From my testing, it performed slightly worse than a Starduster that was mounted just above said telephone pole... That is just what I had up at the time. It didn't outperform the Starduster when it came to DX either. If the EDZ were mounted at the same feed point height as the Starduster's feed point, I have no doubt that it would have outperformed it.
I have talked about vertical EDZ's on this forum in the past, we are talking years ago. Although someone always tried to tell me that a vertical EDZ is a cloud warmer... This is not correct, a vertical EDZ is not a cloud warmer.
A lot of people, including the me from years ago, though that length was the most important part when it came to a vertical antenna's performance. This was one of the lessons that taught me that height was in fact more important, and a smaller vertical antenna mounted higher would outperform the longer vertical antenna mounted not much lower.
The DB
i have found measurements ..but just interested how far away your feeder is hanging next to the radiator ..a gestermate will be fine
I respect your opinion and I am sure your EDZ antenna works great for you at your location.
I also encourage people to build and try different things to gain experience with all types of antennas.
I have been playing radio for many years and I have never seen, or used one single antenna that out performed every other antenna in all conditions and locations.
There are way to many variables in locations, mounting height, surrounding terain, soil conditions, and band conditions to say that any one antenna trumps all others in every setup.
If there was one perfect antenna for every station, no one would be buying/building anything but that antenna.
Some operators have restrictions that only allow very limited options.
This is even more true when working DX.
The very best antenna you can have is the one that works best for you at your location under your conditions.
73
Jeff
I also encourage people to build and try different things to gain experience with all types of antennas.
I have been playing radio for many years and I have never seen, or used one single antenna that out performed every other antenna in all conditions and locations.
There are way to many variables in locations, mounting height, surrounding terain, soil conditions, and band conditions to say that any one antenna trumps all others in every setup.
If there was one perfect antenna for every station, no one would be buying/building anything but that antenna.
Some operators have restrictions that only allow very limited options.
This is even more true when working DX.
The very best antenna you can have is the one that works best for you at your location under your conditions.
73
Jeff
Yea, we do, but data you are putting out is based on the the antenna being mounted in a horizontal position. My modeling, based on the data in the ARRL Antenna Book agrees with the pattern and gain in said books when the dipole and EDZ are horizontal. If I switch both models to vertical, and put the EDZ's bottom at 20 feet off the earth, and the dipole at the same feed point height, you will be closer to a 2.2 dB difference between the two antennas. Move the dipole to the same tip height and the gain drops to 1.29 dB. Move the dipole's bottom to about 10 feet above the EDZ and it shows a gain of 0.47 dB over the dipole. Why the difference from the same antennas mounted horizontally? Vertical and Horizontal polarizations act differently, so you cannot take data from one and just assume it will be the same for the other.
Now factoring in AudioShockwave's point, as well as my own...
From there, in my case, take in to account that the bottom portion of my EDZ was below building level, and I got enough of a difference that my Starduster, which will have slightly less gain than a dipole, mounted about 10 feet higher than said EDZ, outperformed the EDZ in pretty much every way. Your environment and my environment were very different it seems.
If you are in a position that you don't have to worry about things like other buildings and hills and such, great. In my case, I didn't have that luxury.
But, as is shown when I raise the dipole comparison antenna higher the advantage in gain over that (and really any) antenna drops, and the EDZ will eventually be overtaken. The difficulties of raising any antenna beyond a certain point gets more and more difficult, and the EDZ gets to that point sooner than other free standing antennas. In the end I guess the question is how high can you mount the EDZ vs whatever other antenna you want to use. Also, how high are hills and structures in the area compared to said EDZ?
Even if you could raise the EDZ to said heights I think there is an effective upper limit in height to compete with other antennas for local contacts. Because of its directional nature, much like phased arrays used for some ham radio repeaters, at some point most of its signal will simply be over everyone's head, especially mobile antennas that are close to the ground.
Don't take this as me ragging on your antenna or idea. Far from it, I love the idea of a vertical EDZ, I simply have a different experience with said antenna. I have also thought about this antenna and its benefits and shortcomings in various situations in the past. I have also not seen any reputable sources refer to this antenna in its vertical form, and that includes ARRL publications, which makes some things harder. Unfortunately, you cannot simply take the horizontal information and comparisons of an antenna and assume they are the same for a vertical counterpart. It would be nice if we could, but it simply doesn't work... However, I will agree that it is about as good of an antenna you can get, in some very specific situations. I'm happy for you in that, as far as I can tell, you seem to be in one of those situations. The vertical EDZ is a worthy antenna for those who can take advantage of it. Unfortunately, I am not in a location where it will benefit me.
The DB
I have a vertical EDZ. It is a 2m version. Up at 33' feed point (middle). I hoped it would give me a decent jump in performance over the 5/8 wave vertical I had before it. I could not tell any difference in terms of gaining better reception from or to any distant stations.
Maybe it doesn't like the hills in my area.... don't know.
Maybe it doesn't like the hills in my area.... don't know.
Maybe finding the scale for the six meter V4k is as simple as dividing 27.2 by 50.25 (6m SSB call freq).
27.2 ÷ 50.25 = 0.5412935
Then multiply all the relevant 11m V4k dimensions by 0.5412935 for the 6m scale.
I compared the results to a half wave antenna calculator for accuracy and the results were close.
Example: 206.5" (11m 1/2^@27.2Mhz) x 0.5412935 = 111.7771" (6m 1/2^@50.25Mhz)
If someone knows an easier or better way, let me know.
27.2 ÷ 50.25 = 0.5412935
Then multiply all the relevant 11m V4k dimensions by 0.5412935 for the 6m scale.
I compared the results to a half wave antenna calculator for accuracy and the results were close.
Example: 206.5" (11m 1/2^@27.2Mhz) x 0.5412935 = 111.7771" (6m 1/2^@50.25Mhz)
If someone knows an easier or better way, let me know.
9212 divided by frequency in MHz. is the length from tip to connector. The cone support rods are 1/4 wave and the entire length around the loop is also 1/4 wave. Adjust the gamma for VSWR, not the radiator length. These measurements have replaced a lot of 1/2 wave side mounted antennas in my field over the decades. Side mounting gives the dipole nearly a 2db advantage on its strongest side. Adding less than 10% more height in order to top mount this design does not add 2db. However, the coverage is equal to or greater than that of the dipole in its strongest direction but, in a perfect omni pattern.
In some cases we even lost a few feet of height when the dipole was side mounted to a mast already at the top of the tower. When you're at least 100 feet AGL on VHF, several feet either way doesn't make a difference, it all comes down to the gain being focused on the distant horizon. While many people test antennas, few have had the opportunity to compare this design against as many unity gain 1/2 wave dipoles, while virtually eliminating all other variables. It is not uncommon for these stations to reconfirm their 60dbu coverage area after an antenna and TPO change in order to insure compliance with regards to adjacent channel interference guidelines they may be subjected to. Just renting that calibrated field strength receiver for the day has cost some nearly $1,000.
In some cases we even lost a few feet of height when the dipole was side mounted to a mast already at the top of the tower. When you're at least 100 feet AGL on VHF, several feet either way doesn't make a difference, it all comes down to the gain being focused on the distant horizon. While many people test antennas, few have had the opportunity to compare this design against as many unity gain 1/2 wave dipoles, while virtually eliminating all other variables. It is not uncommon for these stations to reconfirm their 60dbu coverage area after an antenna and TPO change in order to insure compliance with regards to adjacent channel interference guidelines they may be subjected to. Just renting that calibrated field strength receiver for the day has cost some nearly $1,000.
Marcius The reason i was asking how far away your feed line is hanging from your radiator is because i was going to model it ....any plans i see for a vertical zep dont have the feed line hanging next to the radiator ..i am pretty certain it will uptest the pattain ....i will measure the distance from your photo..if you are unwilling to give me an approximation to what it is
.There's a way round the feed line problem i have given it some thought before with simula center fed verticals you have the bottom 1/2 of the antenna alloy tubing with the coax running up the center of the tube and the coax choked when it comes out the bottom ...the problem with this most zeps are i think are fed with ladder line
.There's a way round the feed line problem i have given it some thought before with simula center fed verticals you have the bottom 1/2 of the antenna alloy tubing with the coax running up the center of the tube and the coax choked when it comes out the bottom ...the problem with this most zeps are i think are fed with ladder line
sounds logical ...math definitely are not my strong point but i could manage that
Lol, we definitely have a fanboy here... anyway...
I never once disagreed with this being possibly the greatest vertical antenna of all time!!!
If you would bother to actually read my posts and ponder what I am actually saying, you would have gotten that. You are to determined to be adversarial here. As I stated above, more than once, I love this antenna concept.
There are two differences between our views.
- You take data on this antenna in a horizontal layout and assume it will be the same when the antenna is vertical. It is not.
- I am taking in to account the environment around the antenna that many people will have to deal with, while you are ignoring it.
I'm not trying to be mean here, but this really means nothing to me. I know people who have been around antennas for 5 years that are great at working with antennas. There are others I know who have been around antennas for 50+ years, built many of their own, and I wouldn't let them near an antenna. Many of their antennas I had to go back and fix... So yea, years means nothing to me, and the hardest lesson I have learned so far is experience alone only gets you half way to true understanding.
Means how you seem to care about such things... I have been around CB and Ham Radio for 30 years now, and am still active in both. I am on two active antennas teams for local ham radio groups for setting up and working with antennas, and have access to some of the most advanced equipment of anyone on this forum, and have experience using said equipment as I am the one who tunes most of the antennas that said teams set up. While I occasionally mention these things, I never once used them to claim that I know what I am talking about. And as I see it as a cop out in place of a real explanation, I never will.
Seriously, stop wasting our time with how many years you have spent working with antennas (as well as other cop out statements), and start using real explanations. That will get you much further on this forum. You will likely learn something along the way... I did.
I'm sorry, but it does not work this way. An antenna is not an amplifier. What this and any antenna does do is take power from other directions, in the case of this antenna up, a useless direction, and redirect it more towards the horizon, a more useful direction. This is not increasing power, only a redirection of power that already exists. Further, even your own 3 dB over a dipole claim wouldn't be quadrupling the power, only doubling...
Yes, I am one of those hams who built and tested many multiband doublets, most of which are still in use by people today. Please do not waste our time with this as it clearly doesn't directly apply to the antenna we are discussing. Seriously, take your vertical EDZ built for the CB band and see how well it works on the 2 meters ham band, and I'm not talking about repeater work here.
This statement is an over-generalization. HomerBB for one, who is also responding to your posts, was a very prolific CB antenna builder before he became a Ham to the point he was called the 11 meter Macgyver... I also see posts all the time on this and other CB forums about people wanting to build an antenna for their CB. Sure, most purchase, but there are many the have built T2LT's, dipoles, and many others, including some very complex designs. Extended Double Zepps included.
So lets break this down some.
When it comes to Property, or in my words environment, in my descriptions and explanations above, you clearly ignored this like it was irrelevant. You simply said the same thing over and over, and didn't give this any consideration. Because of this, from my point of view, this doesn't seem to mean much to you. Seriously, look at point 2 in my list near the top of this post.
When it comes to Knowledge and Experience, as someone who has accounts on virtually every CB and Ham forum around, you will be hard pressed to find a place with people who are more knowledgeable and experienced than this one, especially posting in a CB forum. We have actual broadcast engineers posting here, one of whom has posted above. And when it comes to HomerBB and AudioShockwav, when they post, their knowledge is top tier, and they have demonstrated that over and over (along with a few others on this forum). Outright dismissing what they said like in the post I'm responding to says more about your knowledge and experience than theirs...
I get it, you are here to help, but so are all of us. So when people need help, help. Just be ready to explain your knowledge rather than rely on x years working with whatever. Also, starting this in a thread about another antenna, a thread and antenna worthy of standing on its own, essentially hijacking it so you can, well, brag about your antenna. A thread deemed worthy off being stickied. Seriously this left a bad taste in my mouth. Bringing about a discussion on your antenna could have been done much better. Strangely, I don't get the impression that you actually want a discussion...
Sorry for the long post...
The DB
So your not here to help others. And you are not here to share ideas. Your definitely not here to learn (well, anymore).
You claim 50 years of experience working with wire antennas, yet in January of last year you asked for help with just such an antenna on this very forum... A question that someone with 50+ years of experience working with wire antennas wouldn't have needed to ask. And that isn't the only time you asked for help within the last year or two.
Taking what was posted above and adding in this quoted text...
Yea, with all due respect, you clearly don't have the knowledge you claim to have, if you did you wouldn't have to worry about others getting upset with you when you made their systems work so much better... You would be the great antenna guru that you are failing miserably at being here.
You have offered nothing of relevance, while trying unsuccessfully to sound bigger than you are.
All of this points in only one direction...
When you get your search light working for the first time, let us know, and show us how you did it. I love to see actual posts about such things, especially when it comes to antennas people don't normally use...
The DB
You claim 50 years of experience working with wire antennas, yet in January of last year you asked for help with just such an antenna on this very forum... A question that someone with 50+ years of experience working with wire antennas wouldn't have needed to ask. And that isn't the only time you asked for help within the last year or two.
Taking what was posted above and adding in this quoted text...
Yea, with all due respect, you clearly don't have the knowledge you claim to have, if you did you wouldn't have to worry about others getting upset with you when you made their systems work so much better... You would be the great antenna guru that you are failing miserably at being here.
You have offered nothing of relevance, while trying unsuccessfully to sound bigger than you are.
All of this points in only one direction...
When you get your search light working for the first time, let us know, and show us how you did it. I love to see actual posts about such things, especially when it comes to antennas people don't normally use...
The DB
- No one is chatting at the moment.
