• 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.
  • Click here to find out how to win free radios from Retevis!

W8JI's 2m J-Pole article

Marconi

Honorary Member Silent Key
Oct 23, 2005
7,235
2,374
343
Houston
The other day Bob and Shockwave were talking about the J-Pole. Bob suggested for us to check the Internet for some J-Pole models to see how the J-Pole skews the pattern. It sounded bad to me and I went on the Internet to check. I found a model describe in an article that W8JI published on his Website and this link is noted below.

The model included the Wires window that is the data entry for Eznec modeling program, so I thought I would see if I could use this information to duplicate his model. My idea was to help explain some questions I had, and for some others on another thread entitled "Homemade Sigma 4 11 meter base antenna." I decided build the model and use it to help demonstrate some issues in question if I could...like how the J-Pole skews the pattern, and which elements in the bottom of the antenna are in-phase and which are not.

In the process of building the model I found two errors that affected the results the article talks about. So, I decided I would fix the errors and present both models as a demonstration of the problems, and in due-course maybe help explain the questions asked earlier.

Below are the two 2 meter models and some images from the article by W8JI: End-fed Vertical and J-pole.

Shockwave I added some notes and the Wires window, along with the tabular Currents log in order to indicate a trick that W8JI uses to allow Eznec to show currents properly. In my efforts to build a J-Pole I could never get the currents to work right, but I was not doing a simple thing right. I will describe this for you, but see if you can figure it out for yourself first, OK? We discussed this issue before in emails, but we did not come to any agreement or good conclusions...except that Eznec did not work as intended.

As a note both of these models have the red line currents turned ON. Note that elements that are in-phase are on the same side of the image and visa-versa.

I do not know if the errors were intended to show something special to the reader or not. As usual in some of these type writings, there is not enough information for a really good understanding unless maybe the reader is really well-up on the technical aspects of two-way radio, but this is what I found.

Take note that the original antenna's mast does not go all the way to the ground and that it is off-center and not straight. The antenna is set at 13.333' above ground and the mast is only 60.12" tall.

I made no efforts to try and duplicate the worst case scenario W8JI talks about briefly either.

I added some notes, but if you have question, just ask.

View attachment W8JI's 2m J-Pole.pdf
 
Last edited:

Marconi,
I think it would be a good idea for you to send your file to 'JI' to see what he says, don't you? He may have an explanation for that "13 foot" error.
- 'Doc
 
I think he's trying to exhibit worse case senario with his choice of mast length, and not connecting it to ground isolates the poor length choice, as he mentions such in his follow up article about the Imax 2000:

The following model is an I-Max 2000 5/8th wave vertical with a vertical feedline or mast connected to the antenna base, and no radials. In this case I picked one of many worse-case feedline or mast lengths:

He goes on to explain why the models are in freespace:

This antenna model is in freespace, so earth reflection gain is not a factor

I also noticed the issue with his mast 'tilt', I guess I'll have to have a go at modelling this and the difference with a non tilted mast ;)
 
I think he's trying to exhibit worse case scenario with his choice of mast length, and not connecting it to ground isolates the poor length choice, as he mentions such in his follow up article about the Imax 2000:

He goes on to explain why the models are in freespace:

I also noticed the issue with his mast 'tilt', I guess I'll have to have a go at modelling this and the difference with a non tilted mast ;)

Well 35, IMO the 1.2" tilt is a simple mistake.

The short mast here is not an example of a worst case mast length. Even in a worst case example we would still connect the mast to the Earth.

Where we see the end of the mast terminate in mid air above the Earth, it is most likely by design, or it is when the model is properly set to produce a free space model, and it has a grounded mast. Then the mast is automatically raised up a little, but I don't think it will be raised up 100" inches higher.
 
if the mast is not connected to earth a worst case scenario would be odd 1/4wave multiples, if it is connected to ground then 1/2wave multiples are the worst case.
 
if the mast is not connected to earth a worst case scenario would be odd 1/4wave multiples, if it is connected to ground then 1/2wave multiples are the worst case.

Bob, I can't remember my results, but I think I posted a series of 1/4 wave and 1/2 wave models at different heights, some time back, trying to prove that very point. If I can find a link I'll re-post the idea.
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • @ kopcicle:
    If you know you know. Anyone have Sam's current #? He hasn't been on since Oct 1st. Someone let him know I'm looking.
  • dxBot:
    535A has left the room.
  • @ AmericanEagle575:
    Just wanted to say Good Morning to all my Fellow WDX members out there!!!!!