New hy-gain sp-500 super penetrator questions,

[cbkidd1]

Morning All,
I just used 3m electric tape on the radiator tubing. Left off the end caps on the three bottom radials. Loosecannon I run my lmr 400 cable from my ft-1000D Into my amp and use the radio's antenna tuner to tune the input to amp. Then from tuner to my swr/mod/pwr/ meter into antenna tuner with meter then antenna. So input and output is tuned on amp. Works great this way. Antenna Is about 36 ft off the ground. I have went from 1300 ft to 700 ft in elevation. For whatever reason I seem to be able to talk skip a lot easier and longer distance than before. On the mountain I could hear say california or nevada but never talk to them now I can. Could It be the location? How can that be after dropping 700 ft. And I hear them and talk there everyday so weird. Maybe I just had a crappy antenna before any ideals? Could do the same with the imax 2000 just not as good.Needle bender. Thank you for the tip about using "Flex Seal" The last thing I need is to have it arc over. Thank god my amp Is only putting out less than a 1000 watts right now. Because of only having 225 amps coming from two jd-200 power supplies. That being because I just don't have the funds on my fixed income to give the amp the amps It needs lol. MarconI you kind of got me worried now about using the vent pipe for antenna. I just can't afford the hinged base plate for my tower. If It helps any I had my step sons put the antenna pipe inside the vent pipe 4 feet for support. I have permanent nerve damage to my back and left foot from surgery that was not done right. So I can't get up on the roof myself to do It. I am hoping to save enough money to get a hinge plate come spring. I want to thank all of you for your tips thoughts and help with the antenna.

 

[Marconi]

MarconI you kind of got me worried now about using the vent pipe for antenna.

#1, don't fret over my suggestions...they are just my opinions about installs on my home. Like I said earlier, I worked several antennas above my roof peak on a cast iron vent pipe thru my rood deck, and I had great success up there with every antenna I installed. It was easy to tune my tunable antennas up there, and I could zero them in easily at install height.

The problem I had...is fixing my roof afterwards. This won't likely happen in all cases for sure, or with you maybe.

I have a buddie that had his antenna connected to his chimney on his full two story house. After a couple of years and a few bad weather events he had trouble with the chimney working right, and it cost him several thousand $ dollars to fix...just like in my case...repairs were expensive. I'm sorry for the concerns I caused you.

I just didn't make my post clear, but this was my only point #1.

Sorry to hear about your disability. My age finally caught up with me in 2011, and I can't really do any outdoor stuff anymore...even though I want too test and compare, right or wrong.

Good luck, and follow your ideas,

 

[Needle Bender]

The following is to show what my Eznec modeling would predict regarding the issues you noted for the SP 500.

I have several old manuals for the SP500/525 made by HyGain, Telex, including the New HyGain version. They show the radiator varying in length with the older manuals showing a longer radiator at 273" inches, and over the years the radiator got shorter and shorter to today's model at 264" inches...with other lengths at different points in time.

These models also show the Top Hat radials slanted down in some versions and being flat in others. A couple of manuals show the antenna image with a slanted Top Hat, while in the same manual showing the assembly diagram indicating the Top Hat radials are flat. Apparently the Top Hat idea was not consistently applied over time. I also agree this difference likely makes little difference.

Below I made two Eznec models, one with a slanted Top Hat vs. another model with a Horizontal Top Hat. NB, if we compare these it shows us very little difference in match and the gain, but like you suggest the difference would not be detectable just using your radio.

I was surprised to see the difference in the maximum RF angles between these two models however. The slanted radial show us a drop in the maximum gain angle of 2* degrees and a small reduction in maximum gain value indicated. Here we also see a small change in match. So NB, there is a difference.

I also think this top hat design may serve more than window dressing too. I can't prove it, but I have heard that making the highest point of a vertical antenna tip larger in size...helps drain static and possibly helps minimize lightning strikes as well.

I did find out that if I removed the Top Hat and adjust the radiator length to show the same reactance and adjust the segment count so the AGT is good...then the model does show a bit less gain. I can't explain this for sure, but IMO the model has improved a bit as a result of removing the TH and thus the gain due to error has been removed...thus the gain shows a little reduction. Maybe I'll post this model later if anybody is interested.

Note: Check the images in the 2nd group of PDF files below. The first two images of the antenna dimensions were sent me years ago. They were marked as 23 channel and 40 channel, but IMO he got them backwards, because the 40 channel exhibit shows the radiator longer than the 23 channel.

Hi Marconi,

I've been busy helping a friend move and haven't had much time to play internet.

I didn't word that well, I meant Parallel as in directly over the radials probably won't be any better or worse that setting them between the radials..

I actually remove the top hat and simply lengthen the radiator to compensate, don't like losing the top 9.5" of my 5/8.radiator to the horizontal or inverted diagonal.

 

[wavrider]

CBKIDD,, contact your local welding shop, or if you have any contacts that are welders, they usually have some flat plate stock and can maybe make you a hinge plate for a few cold beers and a little $$$.

 

[cbkidd1]

Evening all,
There Is a welder that I know of wavrider, Maybe I will give that a try.

 

[Marconi]

Hi Marconi,

I've been busy helping a friend move and haven't had much time to play internet.

I didn't word that well, I meant Parallel as in directly over the radials probably won't be any better or worse that setting them between the radials..

I actually remove the top hat and simply lengthen the radiator to compensate, don't like losing the top 9.5" of my 5/8.radiator to the horizontal or inverted diagonal.

NB, sorry but I forget what we were discussing, and I'll have to go back and get familiar with this old business. Fortunately this thread is not too long and won't be a problem for me with the days gone by so fast...that this old man forgets stuff.

You must have NOT worded it well, because this old man doesn't remember a word of this thread.

I actually remove the top hat and simply lengthen the radiator to compensate, don't like losing the top 9.5" of my 5/8.radiator to the horizontal or inverted diagonal.

I will check this out with my current models and see what my Eznec models predict for your ideas here however.

I am interested in your ideas for the SP 500 antenna however, and I recently did some comparison modeling with my Eznec model of it. I think I was again surprised at a small advantage for this 5/8 wave design with raised radials, but I don't recall right now if making the antenna to specs a bit longer to a .64 wave made any noticeable type of difference or not...I'm not sure.

I don't want to plow through stuff I've already posted either, so maybe later. I'm sure you are gone for another few days by now, and likely won't be around to follow up with me - your being so busy and such. I'm though.

Have you played with any of your real antennas lately or just been contemplating the possibilities? I seem to recall you were going to do some real world testing or comparison work a while back, but again I'm .

 

[cbkidd1]

Evening, A little of topic. If any of you would happen to know of someone looking for a used avanti pdl-2 beam. Please let me know.

 

[Needle Bender]

NB, sorry but I forget what we were discussing, and I'll have to go back and get familiar with this old business. Fortunately this thread is not too long and won't be a problem for me with the days gone by so fast...that this old man forgets stuff.

You must have NOT worded it well, because this old man doesn't remember a word of this thread.


I will check this out with my current models and see what my Eznec models predict for your ideas here however.

I am interested in your ideas for the SP 500 antenna however, and I recently did some comparison modeling with my Eznec model of it. I think I was again surprised at a small advantage for this 5/8 wave design with raised radials, but I don't recall right now if making the antenna to specs a bit longer to a .64 wave made any noticeable type of difference or not...I'm not sure.

I don't want to plow through stuff I've already posted either, so maybe later. I'm sure you are gone for another few days by now, and likely won't be around to follow up with me - your being so busy and such. I'm though.

Have you played with any of your real antennas lately or just been contemplating the possibilities? I seem to recall you were going to do some real world testing or comparison work a while back, but again I'm .

Why, yes I have and can in all knowledge & good faith, attest to the fact that .63 was the perfect length for my last installation.
- but since I no longer live there...

We'll have to wait and see what the next location brings
__________________________________________________________

 

[Marconi]

Why, yes I have and can in all knowledge & good faith, attest to the fact that .63 was the perfect length for my last installation.
- but since I no longer live there...

We'll have to wait and see what the next location brings

Keep us posted on you next location results for the .63 wave vertical.

OK NB, I don't think my Eznec models support such results, but I think I understand that is what you saw at you previous location. My level of work with Eznec will not typically produce results base on location, but we all know that location matters in the real world. It is not proof, but IMO we hear to many reports from folks to question this idea.

IMO the 5/8 to .64 wavelength might only matter if and when the added tip height of one antenna exceeds the tip height of the other antenna at some specific points while raising your antenna...where the longest model might start to show a lower angle in the maximum (TOA) at or near the horizon over the shorter antenna.

To be clear, if I raise two antennas up 1" inch at a time, most of these small changes in height will show no TOA change in either pattern. But, at some points the longer antenna might drop 1* degree in angle, while the shorter antenna remains at the previous angle for its TOA.

The PDF file below is an overlay of 5 various designed antennas from 5/8 to .63 wave with 100" to 108" inch radials. There are differences to be sure, but I don't see a difference I could detect just using my radio. This overlay does not show all the colors well, because the patterns are all overlaid virtually as the same pattern. IMO this is why antenna science tells us the vertical 5/8 wave radiator is the maximum length, for maximum gain, at the lowest angle for a vertical monopole.

The red asterisk (*) indicates the model details located on the right side of the page under the 27.205 MHz notation. The details noted on the left side represents the maximum gain model in this group.

See overlay attachment below.

Can any of you folks guess which model in this group...reports the maximum gain of 4.31 dbi at 8* degrees?

 

[Needle Bender]

Keep us posted on you next location results for the .63 wave vertical.

OK NB, I don't think my Eznec models support such results, but I think I understand that is what you saw at you previous location. My level of work with Eznec will not typically produce results base on location, but we all know that location matters in the real world. It is not proof, but IMO we hear to many reports from folks to question this idea.

IMO the 5/8 to .64 wavelength might only matter if and when the added tip height of one antenna exceeds the tip height of the other antenna at some specific points while raising your antenna...where the longest model might start to show a lower angle in the maximum (TOA) at or near the horizon over the shorter antenna.

To be clear, if I raise two antennas up 1" inch at a time, most of these small changes in height will show no TOA change in either pattern. But, at some points the longer antenna might drop 1* degree in angle, while the shorter antenna remains at the previous angle for its TOA.

The PDF file below is an overlay of 5 various designed antennas from 5/8 to .63 wave with 100" to 108" inch radials. There are differences to be sure, but I don't see a difference I could detect just using my radio. This overlay does not show all the colors well, because the patterns are all overlaid virtually as the same pattern. IMO this is why antenna science tells us the vertical 5/8 wave radiator is the maximum length, for maximum gain, at the lowest angle for a vertical monopole.

The red asterisk (*) indicates the model details located on the right side of the page under the 27.205 MHz notation. The details noted on the left side represents the maximum gain model in this group.

See overlay attachment below.

Can any of you folks guess which model in this group...reports the maximum gain of 4.31 dbi at 8* degrees?

Try adding a .64 and let's see what the numbers are.

Where I was located the ground level was 106' ASL and there was a 230' ridge only 2 miles north, so perhaps a slightly higher TOA was needed to better hear those who were 30-80 miles North.
So, for 27.400 the optimised length was 268.45" of radiator...

plus the average circumference of 2.5"

plus VF of .9979

So, 271.5" total active electrical radiator length for 27.400 (430.76" wavelength) = .63

 

[Needle Bender]

...maybe just a .625, .63 & .64 - ALL with 108" radials for your model, red, blue & black.

- and stick the NV4K in there too!

 

[Marconi]

Try adding a .64 and let's see what the numbers are.

Where I was located the ground level was 106' ASL and there was a 230' ridge only 2 miles north, so perhaps a slightly higher TOA was needed to better hear those who were 30-80 miles North.
So, for 27.400 the optimised length was 268.45" of radiator...

plus the average circumference of 2.5"

plus VF of .9979

So, 271.5" total active electrical radiator length for 27.400 (430.76" wavelength) = .63

I posted your comments in the PDF file with my results for your new ideas, a I note you changed your mind, with a different frequency, not a .63 wave as the best, and now it is the .64 wave I suppose. If you don't model yet...you need to get with the program and help me out sometimes.

NB, base on my models and my personal experiences, it is dubious to expect a .64 wave jump out there with 1 Sunit gain over a 5/8 wave vertical Ground Plane. These two are just not that different.

That is not to say that many conditions don't exist in the operations of our CB radios...that don't produce surprising results on the radio's meter at times. When I see some signal that is remarkable better than another antenna in line...I consider the signal an anomaly...like Shockwave (Donald) use to accuse me of saying.

The 5/8 wave antenna and its little variations in length, is nothing more than a slightly raised up 1/2 wave radiator. IMO, that is because the bottom 1/8 wavelength is out of phase with the rest of the radiator above...and there is little that can mitigate this corruption problem in the base. Plus and within reason...the longer the radiator gets the worse the wasted area on the radiator becomes, so why add length?

If you look close at some of these 5/8 wave models you can see this effect in the pattern and lobes.

IMO this idea is also supported by the fact the Maco V58 is notably shorter and thus less of this corrupted area at the base is noted in the antenna view and less of the effects is noted in the patter view.

The V58 pattern tends to look more like and end fed 1/2 wave...as we see the match becoming much worse towards that of an EFHW. Of course the model does show a little loss in gain, but I doubt anybody could detect that...just using a radio.

The second PDF file shows the V58 included in the mix of other patterns posted above, and I placed the cursor on the maximum lobe to indicate the difference in gain you see in the details below and to the right of the report.

Do you model NB?

You also didn't give me an answer as to which model in either bunch below shows the maximum gain. How about taking a guess, you might be surprised?

Good luck NB and keep us posted if you get to test some of your ideas in the real world.

 

[Marconi]

...maybe just a .625, .63 & .64 - ALL with 108" radials for your model, red, blue & black.

- and stick the NV4K in there too!

Sorry for the N5ESX that is a default color for the overlay feature and it can't be read. That is why I duplicate the model in the red color right below it. BTW, the black line is the working model at the time. In this bunch I also duplicated it as the first dark blue color, and if you'll notice...the title name is the same as the title name below the pattern.

It's alright to ask me questions about these antennas.

My yellow mark was surrendered years ago. Is you name Paul?

If you answer my question above regarding which model produces the 4.31 dbi gain at 8* degrees, I will do what you ask, OKKKKK?

 

[Marconi]

NB, here is an article that talks about the 5/8 wave vertical monopole, by W8JI of much Internet modeling fame.

http://www.w8ji.com/VHF mobile vertical.htm

There is more here on the forum at: The 5/8-Wavelength Antenna Mystique

If the link still works.

 

[Needle Bender]

NB, here is an article that talks about the 5/8 wave vertical monopole, by W8JI of much Internet modeling fame.

http://www.w8ji.com/VHF mobile vertical.htm

There is more here on the forum at: The 5/8-Wavelength Antenna Mystique

If the link still works.

Hi Eddie,

OK I read the W8JI page (again, recall reading it years ago) and it's just hasn't ever played out that way for me.
I recently did just that, used downward 1/4 wave guy wire radials and a 1/4 wave vertical elevated 14' higher than I dare raise the 5/8, but with the tops equivalent the sloping radial 1/2 wave (often mistakenly called a 1/4 wave) was 2-4dB lossy compared to the .63.

Months ago I remember reading a post of yours where you were nice enough to model a .64 overlayed with the NV4K and a .625.
I remember liking the .64 pattern because it had all the low angle (~8°) gain of the 5/8 (plus .07dB!) but had quite a bit better 25°- 30° gain over either the NV4K or the .625, but am having a hard time relocating that post.
I'm wondering why the difference between that .64 model and these latter models.

Odd the 3.69dB on the .64-based model when it clearly shows that point to be the olive green Maco pattern...???

Anyway, it appears that model prefered the .625 for highest (4.31dB) gain.