Area 51 for Antenna Modelers & Builders (See Post #1) - Page 6 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
 

Go Back   Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums > Canadian Internet, Phone, TV and Wireless Service Providers > Over-The-Air (OTA) Digital Television > Antenna Research & Development

Digital Home Helpful Information

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 2009-05-08, 10:41 AM   #76
300ohm
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhere in Delaware on the flat side
Posts: 7,360
Default

Interesting, putting curves on the outside and inside of the mesh produces dips in the gain curve. Ive tried various patterns on the mesh, including one where I followed (in 2 X 4 block style) the outline of Autofils GH10 rod model. I havent found a pattern yet that does better than the ordinary rectangle mesh pattern.
__________________
My builds/plans (not the latest models) are located here.
300ohm is offline   Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 2009-05-08, 01:15 PM   #77
firimari
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 180
Default

Revisiting the reflector-less Single Diamond Koch Fractal antenna, I thought to myself
Quote:
Hey, why can't I set the impedance on this thing to 75 Ohms and just attach the coax directly?
So I ran the optimizer first to minimize the SWR, then again to maximize the gain while keeping the SWR low, and came out with this gain curve:



Not at all shabby, keeping it above 7 between Channel 22 and 44

NEC File:
Code:
CM Experimental Antenna Design X-077
CM Parameterized Reflectorless Single Diamond Grey Hoverman 
CM Second Iteration Koch Curve
CM UHF Antenna 75 Ohm impedance
CM AWG Gauge 12 Copper Wire
CE
GW 2 3 0 0.2502373 0 0 0.2300478 0.0201895 1.0262e-3
GW 3 3 0 0.2300478 0.0201895 0 0.2374377 0.0477688 1.0262e-3
GW 4 3 0 0.2374377 0.0477688 0 0.2098584 0.0403789 1.0262e-3
GW 5 3 0 0.2098584 0.0403789 0 0.1896689 0.0605684 1.0262e-3
GW 6 3 0 0.1896689 0.0605684 0 0.1970588 0.0881477 1.0262e-3
GW 7 3 0 0.1970588 0.0881477 0 0.2246381 0.0955375 1.0262e-3
GW 8 3 0 0.2246381 0.0955375 0 0.2044486 0.115727 1.0262e-3
GW 9 3 0 0.2044486 0.115727 0 0.2118385 0.1433063 1.0262e-3
GW 10 3 0 0.2118385 0.1433063 0 0.1842592 0.1359164 1.0262e-3
GW 11 3 0 0.1842592 0.1359164 0 0.1640697 0.1561059 1.0262e-3
GW 12 3 0 0.1640697 0.1561059 0 0.1566799 0.1285266 1.0262e-3
GW 13 3 0 0.1566799 0.1285266 0 0.1291004 0.1211369 1.0262e-3
GW 14 3 0 0.1291004 0.1211369 0 0.1089109 0.1413264 1.0262e-3
GW 15 3 0 0.1089109 0.1413264 0 0.1163008 0.1689057 1.0262e-3
GW 16 3 0 0.1163008 0.1689057 0 0.0887215 0.1615158 1.0262e-3
GW 17 3 0 0.0887215 0.1615158 0 0.068532 0.1817053 1.0262e-3
GW 18 3 0 0.068532 0.1817053 0 0.0869267 0.2000999 1.0262e-3
GW 19 3 0 0.0869267 0.2000999 0 0.1120542 0.193367 1.0262e-3
GW 20 3 0 0.1120542 0.193367 0 0.1053214 0.2184947 1.0262e-3
GW 21 3 0 0.1053214 0.2184947 0 0.123716 0.2368893 1.0262e-3
GW 22 13 0 0.123716 0.2368893 0 0.251586 0.2368893 1.0262e-3
GX 22 011
GW 1 49 0 -0.250237 0 0 0.2502373 0 1.0262e-3
GE 0
GN -1
EK
EX 0 1 25 0 1 0
FR 0 39 0 0 470 6
RP 0 37 73 1001 -180 0 5 5
EN
SVG for one quadrant of the element (scaled 1mm=1mm so that I can use it as a bending template!)
Code:
<?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?> 
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN"  
  "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd"> 
<svg width="215.9mm" height="279.4mm" version="1.1" 
  xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" 
  xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> 
<defs> 
  <polyline id="Element" fill="none" stroke="black" stroke-width="2.0524e-03"
            points="0.2502373,0 0.2300478,0.0201895
0.2300478,0.0201895 0.2374377,0.0477688
0.2374377,0.0477688 0.2098584,0.0403789
0.2098584,0.0403789 0.1896689,0.0605684
0.1896689,0.0605684 0.1970588,0.0881477
0.1970588,0.0881477 0.2246381,0.0955375
0.2246381,0.0955375 0.2044486,0.115727
0.2044486,0.115727 0.2118385,0.1433063
0.2118385,0.1433063 0.1842592,0.1359164
0.1842592,0.1359164 0.1640697,0.1561059
0.1640697,0.1561059 0.1566799,0.1285266
0.1566799,0.1285266 0.1291004,0.1211369
0.1291004,0.1211369 0.1089109,0.1413264
0.1089109,0.1413264 0.1163008,0.1689057
0.1163008,0.1689057 0.0887215,0.1615158
0.0887215,0.1615158 0.068532,0.1817053
0.068532,0.1817053 0.0869267,0.2000999
0.0869267,0.2000999 0.1120542,0.193367
0.1120542,0.193367 0.1053214,0.2184947
0.1053214,0.2184947 0.123716,0.2368893
0.123716,0.2368893 0.251586,0.2368893" />
</defs>
<g transform="scale(3543.307)">
<g transform="translate(-0.05,0.015)">
<use xlink:href="#Element" />
</g></g>
</svg>

Last edited by firimari; 2009-05-08 at 01:20 PM. Reason: number the nec model correctly :)
firimari is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 06:42 AM   #78
300ohm
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhere in Delaware on the flat side
Posts: 7,360
Default

I see you already got the stubs on the X077 shortened. I was going to try to put balls (“capacitive hats”) on the stubs, like the old rabbit ears trick that Ken Nist reminded me of here : http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/R...s.html#Getting

Four 1 inch balls, 26 gauge, 30 inches off to the side, starting with wire 1000,
Geometry and Segment checked :
http://www.wuala.com/300ohm/Documents/4_1inchBalls.nec

Now, to figure out where to get hollow 1 inch aluminum and/or copper balls, heh. (I know I can crumple up aluminum and copper foil, but that looks so amateurish)

Quote:
Revisiting the reflector-less Single Diamond Koch Fractal antenna, I thought to myself
Quote:
Hey, why can't I set the impedance on this thing to 75 Ohms and just attach the coax directly?
You still need a balun since youre going from a balanced antenna to an unbalanced coax line.
__________________
My builds/plans (not the latest models) are located here.
300ohm is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 08:36 AM   #79
firimari
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 180
Default

You mean I can't just solder my 75 ohm line in the middle like the hentenna?

I was actually considering building a 'symmetric log periodic balun' as soon as I can figure out what all the measurements need to be for a UHF one.
firimari is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 09:51 AM   #80
300ohm
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhere in Delaware on the flat side
Posts: 7,360
Default

Quote:
A novel ultra-wideband balun with 3 to 6 GHz passband
That sounds good.
__________________
My builds/plans (not the latest models) are located here.
300ohm is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 03:31 PM   #81
RamKat
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 502
Default

Quote:
Now, to figure out where to get hollow 1 inch aluminum and/or copper balls, heh. (I know I can crumple up aluminum and copper foil, but that looks so amateurish)
Just to see if it will work and to have a good sphere I suggest you get polistyrene (sp) balls that you can get a bag full off (different sizes) at the arts section of any $ store and wrap it in aluminum foil. Pre-drilling the hole and lining it with a foil sleeve (that you flare on the outside) before you do the wrapping will ensure a good electrical contact between the sphere and the rod. Cover the hole on the other end with a piece of hard plasting to prevent the rod from poking through the foil.

Keep us posted on your results
RamKat is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 04:15 PM   #82
300ohm
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhere in Delaware on the flat side
Posts: 7,360
Default

Quote:
arts section of any $ store and wrap it in aluminum foil.
Yeah, I thought about that too. On firimani's earlier versions of the small fractal GH, the stub lengths were keeping the antenna from being as compact as it could be. But on the above version, he already has that optimized for the shorter stubs.
__________________
My builds/plans (not the latest models) are located here.
300ohm is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 07:00 PM   #83
Walter Dnes
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Vaughan, Ontario (near Dufferin and Steeles)
Posts: 1,894
Default

After a bit of experimenting, I've managed to come up with an double-sized bowtie plus reflectors (24" wide x 9" high x 5" deep) that gets raw gain of 8 db across channels 14..69, with a SWR just below 3. If optimized for channels 14..51, it's 8.5 db raw. Is it worth posting it here, or is that rather weak for an antenna that size?
__________________
OTA brings you crystal-clear, uncompressed HDTV, no simsubbing, and the real SuperBowl commercials. You can't get all that on satellite... OR CABLE.
Walter Dnes is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 07:11 PM   #84
RamKat
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 502
Default

Quote:
Is it worth posting it here, or is that rather weak for an antenna that size?
Go for it Walter_Dnes. There is always someone looking for a wide band low profile antenna for closeby transmitters and that could be installed in small attics (or I guess on valuable real estate on an antenna mast) A smaller antenna also has in general a better WAF when mounted on the outside of the house (WAF = Wife Approval Factor)

I too have worked on a wide band double bay version of a bowtie. Will post my results soon.
RamKat is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 07:51 PM   #85
300ohm
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhere in Delaware on the flat side
Posts: 7,360
Default

Quote:
double-sized bowtie plus reflectors (24" wide x 9" high x 5" deep) that gets raw gain of 8 db across channels 14..69, with a SWR just below 3. If optimized for channels 14..51, it's 8.5 db raw.
Yeah post it here. I built a single bay version of that a long long time ago, (far, far away, NOT) for vhf, heh. Have you run the vhf-high charts on it ?
__________________
My builds/plans (not the latest models) are located here.
300ohm is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 09:17 PM   #86
stampeder
OTA Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Delta, BC (96Av x 116St)
Posts: 24,031
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Dnes
Is it worth posting it here, or is that rather weak for an antenna that size?
Absolutely its worth posting here. To paraphrase someone from somewhere sometime... more discoveries happen by asking "Why Not?" than "Why?"
stampeder is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 09:28 PM   #87
RamKat
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 502
Default X087: 2 Bay Bowtie with a Channel 14 to 88 response

This is addicting - time goes way much too fast

I played with this Bowtie design and basically gave the optimization algorithm a free hand in adjusting every parameter. The only parameter on the rods that are the same are the gaps between the rods. Even the bow tie upper and lower parts were allowed to be a different lengths as well as different angles.

The bowtie lengths ended up 9.83 and 9.32 inches and the angles at 24.5 and 23.8 degrees - Close but different - It might have been just the optimization tollerance? I have also allowed the bowtie seperation and the feed separation to be different.

It was set to optimize over the whole UHF band Channel 14 to 88 in 24MHz steps.

It was set-up for 10 AWG for all elements - Here is what it looks like.


(Total size is about 33 inches Wide by 30 inches High)



Here is the response curve - still have to do the spread sheet thing to determine raw gain

RamKat is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 10:09 PM   #88
300ohm
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhere in Delaware on the flat side
Posts: 7,360
Default

Quote:
It was set to optimize over the whole UHF band Channel 14 to 88 in 24MHz steps.
Heh, the UHF band never went up to 88 even in the old days. But you are showing the incredible bandwidth the bowtie has.

By splitting the reflectors like that, youre giving up vhf-hi (174 - 216 mhz) gain on the bowtie. (with the high SWR and low raw gain, the net gain is well into the negative numbers) Try it with long (28 - 44 inch) non-split reflectors. The bowtie and GH are quite different in that respect.
Also, the top, bottom and middle reflectors are probably contributing very little to your overall gain.
__________________
My builds/plans (not the latest models) are located here.
300ohm is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 10:09 PM   #89
firimari
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 180
Default

Hey, you forgot the NEC file!

Yeah, I'm currently trying to add the balun into the simulation. It is, of course, messing everything else. It's certainly a case of 'Why Not?'
firimari is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2009-05-10, 11:22 PM   #90
Walter Dnes
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Vaughan, Ontario (near Dufferin and Steeles)
Posts: 1,894
Default

X-90 is a bowtie with reflectors. As noted in the comments, set variable SKALE to 1.11 to optimize for channels 14..69 and 1.20 to optimize for channels 14..51. With SKALE = 1.11, beware of the sharp dropoff just below channel 14.

Here is the code...
Code:
CM Bowtie with reflectors
CM Channel 14..69 version use SKALE=1.11
CM Channel 14..51 version use SKALE=1.20
CE
SY E_RAD=0.1
SY FEED=1
SY FB2=FEED/2
SY ANGL=22.5
SY COS_ANGL=COS(ANGL)
SY SIN_ANGL=SIN(ANGL)
SY BASE_E_LEN=8.5
SY BASE_R1_LEN=10.5
SY BASE_RH_SEP=5.0
SY BASE_RV_SEP=2.0
SY SKALE=1.11
SY E_LEN=BASE_E_LEN*SKALE
SY R1_LEN=BASE_R1_LEN*SKALE
SY RH_SEP=BASE_RH_SEP*SKALE
SY RV_SEP=BASE_RV_SEP*SKALE
SY ZZ1=E_LEN*SIN_ANGL
SY YY1=E_LEN*COS_ANGL+FB2
GW      8       15      -RH_SEP -R1_LEN RV_SEP  -RH_SEP -FB2    RV_SEP E_RAD
GW      9       15      -RH_SEP FB2     RV_SEP  -RH_SEP R1_LEN  RV_SEP E_RAD
GW      10      15      -RH_SEP -R1_LEN RV_SEP*2        -RH_SEP -FB2  RV_SEP*2 E_RAD
GW      11      15      -RH_SEP FB2     RV_SEP*2        -RH_SEP R1_LEN RV_SEP*2E_RAD
GX      4      001
GW      1       3       0       -FB2    0       0       FB2     0       E_RAD
GW      2       9       0       -FB2    0       0       -YY1    ZZ1     E_RAD
GW      3       9       0       -FB2    0       0       -YY1    -ZZ1    E_RAD
GW      4       9       0       FB2     0       0       YY1     ZZ1     E_RAD
GW      5       9       0       FB2     0       0       YY1     -ZZ1    E_RAD
GW      6       15      -RH_SEP -R1_LEN 0       -RH_SEP -FB2    0       E_RAD
GW      7       15      -RH_SEP FB2     0       -RH_SEP R1_LEN  0       E_RAD
GS      0       0       0.0254          ' All in in.
GE      0
EK
EX      0       1       2       0       1       0
GN      -1
FR      0       1       0       0       470     6
RP      0       1       37      1510    90.     0.      0.      10.     0.     0.
And the gain graph



And the SWR graph


Last edited by Walter Dnes; 2009-05-10 at 11:45 PM. Reason: Fix a couple of typos
Walter Dnes is offline   Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:41 PM.

OTA Forum Sponsor


Search Digital Home

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.