Base V verses inverted V dipole

[TruckerKevin]

this is just a quick but curious question that I’ve been unable to find a solid answer for, whenever I research a V dipole almost all the information I pull up is an inverted V.

What would be the plus, or the negative of an upright V verses it being inverted? Why does everyone seem to favor it being inverted? I could understand if one was stinging it by wire in a tree why they would want it inverted, but is there any repercussions if you have the ability and the real estate to put it up right?

 

[binrat]

Inverted with wire is pretty simple to make. A high feed point with ends down to a lower tie off anchor. You get height without needing 3 high supports, just 1.

 

[Riverman]

It's my understanding that the majority of the energy is produced at the feedpoint and lessens toward the ends. With an inverted V, the feedpoint is much higher than in a regular V, which would be desirable.

Now the experts can chime in and we'll both learn.

 

[The DB]

Riverman got it.


The DB

 

[Marconi]

Another consideration might be, what happens if we don't change the height of the feed point and then compare /\ to V?

 

[Riverman]

Another consideration might be, what happens if we don't change the height of the feed point and then compare /\ to V?

I would think the regular V theorectically would be a little better since the portion of the antenna doing most of the radiating would be at a slightly higher height, although the difference might be negligible.

Is that something you can model?

 

[Marconi]

I have an inverted V model and I will try it.

 

[Marconi]

I used my Inverted V model with the elements down, and raised the radials up at the same degree*

I made no changes to the model with the elements up, even though the match did change little.

Below are the pattern overlays for both. There is a difference, but I doubt you could tell...just using your radio.

 

[Marconi]

I noticed in my models included the mast with a Feed Line. Just in case that made some difference regarding the question, I re-did both models with no mast and I get similar gain results.

For what it's worth however, I noticed that the model with the elements raised up showed a maximum gain angle of 13* degrees above the horizon while the model with the elements pointed down showed 15* degrees. This shows up on the overlays I posted above, but I failed to make a point about it.

 

[Riverman]

As you said, one would probably never notice the difference, especially if both were mounted high and in the clear. Mounted lower, say at 15' near a house, the regular V would definitely be the antenna of choice.

 

[binrat]

As you said, one would probably never notice the difference, especially if both were mounted high and in the clear. Mounted lower, say at 15' near a house, the regular V would definitely be the antenna of choice.

Yes, true. But with the extra mast / support requirements it may not be viable all the time. If 2x whips instead of wire are used it would be a great little semi-portable around the house and camping setup. Hmm, I think MFJ has something like that for HF. A quick google search and if you lay it horzontal, it becomes a directional antenna with a claim 3 dBd.

 

[Riverman]

Yes, true. But with the extra mast / support requirements it may not be viable all the time. If 2x whips instead of wire are used it would be a great little semi-portable around the house and camping setup. Hmm, I think MFJ has something like that for HF. A quick google search and if you lay it horzontal, it becomes a directional antenna with a claim 3 dBd.

Right as rain.
I currently have an inverted V wire dipole up and tire quickly at the thought of converting it to a regular V. Plus, I don't think my wife would go for two additional masts even higher than the one I have, so it'll stay as is.

 

[Road Squawker]

I would think the regular V theorectically would be a little better since the portion of the antenna doing most of the radiating would be at a slightly higher height,....

Is that something you can model?

did you type that wrong?, it's exactly backwards,

The inverted V has the highest feedpoint where the most power is radiated, and the lower ends (closer to the earth) can lower the impedance, enabling a better "match".

 

[Riverman]

did you type that wrong?, it's exactly backwards,

The inverted V has the highest feedpoint where the most power is radiated, and the lower ends (closer to the earth) can lower the impedance, enabling a better "match".

I was referring to the feedpoints being the same height as Marconi suggested in Post #5.

 

[tuner]

This is interesting

https://antennaproducts.com/product/vh-830t/