Index Thread Archive Sep-2000 Archive Send
 Main index   Previous in threadNext in thread   Previous in archiveNext in archive   Index by Subject for Sep-2000Index by Author for Sep-2000Index by Date for Sep-2000   Index by Subject for ArchiveIndex by Author for ArchiveIndex by Date for Archive   Reply to messageNew message 

Subject: Isolated elements
Author: N2TK <n2tk@earthlink.net>
Date: 04-Sep-2000 20:58:48
Hi Guy. Boy, did you give me food for thought about the comment on shunt
feeding the tower. I presently shunt feed my tower for 160M. My antennas are
a TH7 at 81', A3WS at 92' and a 402CD at 103'.
I have on order a C31XR, Mag240N and a Warc-7. The plan is to put the C31 at
81', the Mag240N at 92' and the Warc-7 at 103'. I figure the order of the
antennas should cause minimum interaction between bands.
I didn't think about the problem with the insulated elements on 160m. Will
be curious how you make out with your C31 with shunt feeding. Looking for
any feedback on how to do this properly and which antennas I should consider
the 1.8M circuit to the boom?

Tony

-----Original Message-----
From: Guy Olinger, K2AV [mailto:k2av@contesting.com]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 11:27 PM
To: Danny; Force12Talk@qth.com
Subject: Re: [Force 12 Talk] Isolated elements

One of the things that insulated elements do is to eliminate
miscellaneous resonances that can be found with such combinations as
half an element to the boom, up the boom to the opposite side of a
different element.

A change of that nature between the Cushcraft 402CD and the XM240, the
latter a "beefed up" "electrically identical" upgrade of the former, is
widely believed to explain the latter's propensity to detune the 15
meter section of close tribanders. This was a characteristic not found
on the 402CD, probably the best mini 40 meter beam going. (Yes, I know
this is a Force 12 reflector, and that Natan is going to choke on his
milk and cookies whenever he reads this. The 240N is not a "mini" beam,
but 85% of full size.)

What the 402CD didn't have going for it was BEEF. There were a number of
strength modifications available for it, various sources. Cushcraft's
answer to the need for beef was the XM240, which, it turns out, really
needed F12's larger element mounts, PVC wraps for the element, and
larger U-bolts, all to insulate the elements.

On the local scene, receiving wise, an F12 antenna with the insulated
elements will do better at resisting picking up off-pattern local noise,
due to the lack of the aforementioned miscellaneous resonances.

On the other side of the coin, if one is using a shunt-fed tower with a
top F12 antenna as a 160 meter transmitting antenna, at 1.5 kW, the
highest ground connected point will carry a large peak RF voltage.

These RF voltages will see the insulated elements as another place to
go, and can jump the gap and create carbon paths. I will probably
connect the center of my C31's twenty meter director and reflector via a
1.8 MHz series circuit to the boom. This will keep the RF from building
up to a peak value to jump across the PVC. At all the other points, the
RF voltage will be 15 feet or more from the peak RF voltage which now
resides out at the tip of the front and rear 20 meter elements, which
reduces it significantly.

- - . . . . . . - - . . . . - - . . - . .

73, Guy
k2av@contesting.com
Apex, NC, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: Danny <ON7NQ@pandora.be>
To: <Force12Talk@qth.com>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 7:42 AM
Subject: [Force 12 Talk] Isolated elements


> Hello
>
> Is there any specific reason why Force 12 isolates the elements
> from the boom ?
>
>
> 73 Danny - ON7NQ -
>
> ON7NQ@pandora.be
> http://users.pandora.be/ON7NQ (best viewed with java enabled )
> http://www.qsl.net/on7nq
>
> DXC : ON0DXA
> WWDXC :EA7URC-5 , PI5EHV-8
> #CQDX chatbox
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas,
Inc.
> Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12
>
> Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com
> To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com
> Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk
> For problems with the list, contact n4zr@qth.com
>
>
>



--------------------------------------------
Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas, Inc.
Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12

Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com
To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com
Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk
For problems with the list, contact n4zr@qth.com





--------------------------------------------
Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas, Inc.
Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12

Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com
To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com
Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk
For problems with the list, contact n4zr@qth.com


This Thread
  Date   Author  
04-Sep-2000 Will
* 04-Sep-2000 N2TK
31-Aug-2000 Al Williams
31-Aug-2000 Pete Smith
29-Aug-2000 greg NoT a PhD
29-Aug-2000 Barry Kirkwood
29-Aug-2000 ww
29-Aug-2000 Guy K2AV Olinger
29-Aug-2000 Wil DJ7AA
28-Aug-2000 Guy K2AV Olinger
28-Aug-2000 wa4dou@juno.com
28-Aug-2000 Danny
This Author (Sep-2000)
  Subject   Date  
* Isolated elements 04-Sep-2000