Zero-Five 24 Foot Vertical

[wavrider]

There's actually a point of diminishing returns for ground radials. I think optimum is somewhere between 45 and 60 radials. Don't remember the exact number and I don't feel like looking it up!

I used a home brew single band 20 meter vert with 45 radials and it was amazing how well it worked for DX. Never could justify spending hundreds of dollars on a commercially made vert when I could make one from an 18' crappie pole and wire. It looked good and was low profile too.

There sure is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to ground radials.

ON4UN low band DX book has an explanation. A lot of info online also. I think around 48 radials is the number, any more added gives very little difference.

I use around 24 ground radials and call it done. Gives a little more bandwidth at the expense of efficiency, but then that is what the amplifier is for, to make up for the antenna losses

 

[wavrider]

Generally speaking all good antenna systems have be optimized to get the results wanted, an compared to a reference antenna to make sure you get the results wanted. Your criteria for an antenna will always be somewhat different than others because of environment differences and needs all differ. My best tool for getting the results wanted is A/B testing, which takes time to check all aspics of the system you put together. This is the part of this hobby that intrigues me the most...........KB6HRT

What two antennas are you A/B testing?

 

[BOOTY MONSTER]

FWIU a elevated 5/8 or 1/4 wave omni with a elevated ground plane doesn't need but 3 or 4 1/4 wave ground elements to do well . but i just concern myself with the chicken band ..... does that change change with other frequencies/bands ?

 

[walterb]

Zerofive Antennas

BM,
You may have done some homework on this one BM, an read the installation sheet from Zerofive for the 10-40m Goundplane, the 100' of coax is the starting point for coax on the project! The antenna will be set at 18' to its bottom. Reference antenna is a Cushcraft R8 6-40m vertical ground mounted over the 3500' of radials. Why am I doing the project, I have a small lot, once I complete phase one of getting the antenna system working as it should, will start on phase two which will be developed so the antenna system will do 10-160m with good performance on as many meter bands as I can, have the receive be as good or better than the R-8. This should take me through the top of this SSC. Reason I use Zerofive antennas is because if I need any special parts or any kind of a special mount, Tom will provide it for me, he is very easy to work with. He knows vertical antennas an what he is talking about from a practical stand point, an his antennas standup to strong winds, even the micro bursts that we have in AZ.............KB6HRT

 

[wavrider]

FWIU a elevated 5/8 or 1/4 wave omni with a elevated ground plane doesn't need but 3 or 4 1/4 wave ground elements to do well . but i just concern myself with the chicken band ..... does that change change with other frequencies/bands ?

Holds true for all frequencies at least in the HF region.

 

[wavrider]

BM,
You may have done some homework on this one BM, an read the installation sheet from Zerofive for the 10-40m Goundplane, the 100' of coax is the starting point for coax on the project! The antenna will be set at 18' to its bottom. Reference antenna is a Cushcraft R8 6-40m vertical ground mounted over the 3500' of radials. Why am I doing the project, I have a small lot, once I complete phase one of getting the antenna system working as it should, will start on phase two which will be developed so the antenna system will do 10-160m with good performance on as many meter bands as I can, have the receive be as good or better than the R-8. This should take me through the top of this SSC. Reason I use Zerofive antennas is because if I need any special parts or any kind of a special mount, Tom will provide it for me, he is very easy to work with. He knows vertical antennas an what he is talking about from a practical stand point, an his antennas standup to strong winds, even the micro bursts that we have in AZ.............KB6HRT

Comparing these two antennas up to 40 meters ok, but after that the R8 will not work 60 through 160 meters so what is the comparison?

The Zero five 43' will not work 160 either, but your tuner will show a low vswr so you can heat the coax up with the impedance mismatch.

 

[walterb]

Zerofive Antennas

Waverider,
Have a 43' vertical that I will use over my ground field for 60-75-80 an 160m that was built up from the standard Zerofive 43' vertical setup, Its a Barn Burner on 160m according to the guys I talked to with it on 160m in N.M, AZ, NV and CA after some changes were made to the ZF 43' antenna system, I gave up upper band performance to do so, thats what I am doing building up a 27' 10-40 GP vertical system to improve the DX capabilities on 10-40m, an
yes you can make a 43' vertical perform as well or better than an inverted L on 160m if you are willing to do the work, spend the money to do it. You can read my post on eham on ZF 43' vertical antenna systems, I describe what worked for me in doing just that..............KB6HRT

 

[wavrider]

Waverider,
Have a 43' vertical that I will use over my ground field for 60-75-80 an 160m that was built up from the standard Zerofive 43' vertical setup, Its a Barn Burner on 160m according to the guys I talked to with it on 160m in N.M, AZ, NV and CA after some changes were made to the ZF 43' antenna system, I gave up upper band performance to do so, thats what I am doing building up a 27' 10-40 GP vertical system to improve the DX capabilities on 10-40m, an
yes you can make a 43' vertical perform as well or better than an inverted L on 160m if you are willing to do the work, spend the money to do it. You can read my post on eham on ZF 43' vertical antenna systems, I describe what worked for me in doing just that..............KB6HRT

So basically what you are trying to get me to believe is that you have discovered a way to change the laws of Physics to suit your requirements.

By all means please explain how you managed to do that?

 

[walterb]

Zerofive Antennas

Waverider,
I am not trying to make you believe anything, that is not a goal of mine. I like to test antennas try to perfect the antennas I have to work with a little better at my QTH. I pass on information to other interested HAM's an radio operators results obtained, sound like you think you know a lot about Physics and building antennas, care to pass on some of your antenna successes an antenna knowledge to the rest us............KB6HRT

 

[wavrider]

Waverider,
I am not trying to make you believe anything, that is not a goal of mine. I like to test antennas try to perfect the antennas I have to work with a little better at my QTH. I pass on information to other interested HAM's an radio operators results obtained, sound like you think you know a lot about Physics and building antennas, care to pass on some of your antenna successes an antenna knowledge to the rest us............KB6HRT

No problem.

Good reading here so it may help explain some stuff
Understanding Antennas For the Non-technical Ham by N4JA - An online Book!

some more good reading for resonant multi band home brew antennas

The KJ4IIF Multiband "FAN" Dipole for 160, 80 and 40 Meters

I also like to experiment with antennas. Build from scratch per say. I admit more of them do not work well but some do work well. I try to understand why they do not work and then correct it to work.

The basics of all antenna building experimenting is Physics. Those rules will never change.

I have tried the ground mounted arrays, the four squares, the bi squares, the Lazy H's on and on and on. Anytime a radiator is less than 1/4 wl it is inferior for efficiency. Any length of wire or aluminum can be made to work.
But how efficient is it?

Unrealistic claims are just that unrealistic. If it is made by an antenna manufacture or an experimenter. Take the claims, apply the law of physics (basic antenna theory) and then the results can be seen.

The basics of all comparisons is a plain simple 1/2 wl dipole. They are hard to beat if installed around 1/2 wl above the ground. Of course on 160 not many can do that so most antennas are NVIS. A shortened vertical will work better DX than a low mounted dipole. Of course the low bands propagate differently than the upper HF bands. No one has figured out the science behind 160 meter propagation.

Another link for antennas and what they will and will not do.

Antennas for Receiving and Transmitting

 

[walterb]

Zerofive Antennas

wavrider,
Thank you for some of your references on antennas, I did compare one of your references W8JI 102' G5RV with the one I built at this QTH an is in use for the last 3+ years.
W8JI KB6HRT
75M 3.1 75m 1.4
40m 4.1 40m 2.3
20m 2.1 20m 2.1
17m 15.1 17m 8.1
15m 10.1 15m 1.2
12m 3.1 12m 1.5
10m 30.1 10m 3.1
Most standard HF radios that have antenna tuners built in to them require you to not use the antenna tuner on an swr above 3.1 I do use my ICOM 7600 on all bands except 17m with the G5RV I built, I did not reach the goal for 17m yet but did on the other bands. I have put as much as 1K on this G5RV an it has never blinked so far. My point being everything in life can be made to be better, but sometimes its better to be able to think outside of the box, and sometimes its just being lucky that helps..........KB6HRT

 

[wavrider]

One of the references was my article as you asked me to share with you.

G5RV? If you are throwing a lobe in the direction desired then it is fine, but what about the nulls?

I prefer symmetrical antennas, using 1:1 current baluns at the feed point for current distribution. Easier to predict the radiation pattern of the antenna if it is symmetrical.

Feeding a wire at a current null will work for impedance matching, but then the question is, how efficient. I put up an OCF dipole for a visually challenged ham friend of mine. He needed an antenna that required no tuner and multi band , also on a budget.

He played with that OCF for a year, then I put him up a multi band fan dipole. Difference is amazing on the receive and transmit. The symmetrical antenna will work better than an OCF as the dipole can be oriented so the radiation pattern is in the desired direction, where who knows where the OCF lobes will be radiating at.

Once again I will refer to the half wave dipole as a standard. Hard to beat that half wave dipole.

Now I still would like to know how the laws of physics were changed so the "barn burner" 43' vertical was such a great antenna on 160 meters?

That 43' vertical will work on 80 meters just so so , it will kick butt on DX operating 40 meters.

In reality, ( yah back to that ) your vertical would be put to shame by a shortened trapped dipole for 160.

There are multi band dipoles 40/80/160 that use coax traps the home brewer can easily build that will fit in your lot size and out perform any 43 foot vertical on 160 meters ( and cost a hell of a lot less in $$$). Some bandwidth will be sacrificed as is the nature of using traps so it will need to be tuned to the portion of the band you want to operate in. It will not be as efficient as a full 1/2 WL dipole but the receiving station will be hard pressed to tell the difference.

I do not claim to know everything about antennas, anyone who does would be a fool. I can say I build them and test them, so no arm chair antenna guru here.

I also know anyone who claims a 43' vertical on 160 meters is a "barn burner" obviously has never compared it to a decent 160 meter antenna.

W4RNL has a great explanation of the top 5 backyard antennas, good reading.
Ham Radio Nation - Amateur Radio Social Network

 

[wavrider]

wavrider,
Most standard HF radios that have antenna tuners built in to them require you to not use the antenna tuner on an swr above 3.1 I do use my ICOM 7600 on all bands except 17m with the G5RV I built, I did not reach the goal for 17m yet but did on the other bands. I have put as much as 1K on this G5RV an it has never blinked so far. My point being everything in life can be made to be better, but sometimes its better to be able to think outside of the box, and sometimes its just being lucky that helps..........KB6HRT

I build and operate resonant antennas. That way I can tune my amplifier (if I am using one )into the dummy load and then switch to the antenna and make the contact. I hear so many ops tuning up on freq which is inconsiderate, creating unnecessary QRM on the bands.

Some of my SS rigs have built in AT, I guess they work I never used them, the old tubers I prefer to run really do not need a tuner as they will easily match a 3:1 VSWR just by tuning the output for the dip in the plate current or cathode depending on which rig I am using.

The antenna is 95% of a stations signal, seems like a shame to have a $4000.00 radio using a G5RV for an antenna.

Keep experimenting, that is the fun of the hobby. Who knows maybe one day you just might be able to change the laws of physics, stranger things have happened.

 

[walterb]

Zerofive Antennas

wavrider
Have a little more background would like to share, I was one of Bill Fanchoner customers
W9INN antennas, he was an old school antenna builder, from my come from the best of the best by far. I use and have used W9INN antennas, have one custom one he built for me about 15+ years ago that I will rebuild as many times as I can, to keep it in the air. The G5RV I built is a very hot antenna compared to all other dipole antennas that I have compared it to when I was building it. I use it for Rag Chewing in the mornings on 75m to station 1500 miles away. I burned one of the 75m coils on the Custom 75-40-20m W9INN antenna Bill made for me an had to wind two new coils for it, other than that it works super on 40 an 20 meters better than any 20m dipole I have ever built or used. What Bill did pass on to me, building antennas is just as much an ART as it is science an the only way I have ever been able to tell how good an antenna preforms is by A/B testing against a reference antenna, an how well the antenna holds up over time..........KB6HRT

 

[walterb]

Zerofive Antennas

wavrider
Don't know if you read my post on Zerofive 43' verticals on eham or not but you may have realized I turned the ZF 43' vertical into a resonant antenna system, before I brought the ZF 43' vertical I tried a trapped dipole that would play but it had a very narrow bandwith, then I built a 204' G5RV and I got it to work fairly good on 160m but it was down 2S units on receive on 75m where I do most of my talking, I then tried the ZF 43' vertical using a full range antenna tuner an put down the 3500' of radials under it, my receive picked up but the transmit was so so, I have a mobile screwdriver antenna that I had used on another antenna project that I was not using an I incorporated both these antennas together to make this antennas system, an it has worked beyond my wildest dreams, works great NVIS and works very good DX as well, I am not an antenna guru ether but I do keep plugging 73s its my bed time..........KB6HRT