Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > ATM and DIY Projects
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 5.00 average.
  #21  
Old 25-09-2006, 10:21 PM
ballaratdragons's Avatar
ballaratdragons (Ken)
The 'DRAGON MAN'

ballaratdragons is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Dark at Snake Valley, Victoria
Posts: 14,412
Whoah!!!!

What tha?

In English please
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 26-09-2006, 01:59 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Thanks Jerry. You have given me much to think about. When a little spare cash is forthcoming, i may be able to walk that path.

Cheers,

Barry.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 27-09-2006, 08:38 PM
74tuc
Registered User

74tuc is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sandy Creek(Sth.Aust.)
Posts: 153
Antenna

No problem Barry.

I have an antenna that you are welcome to have free of charge if you can organise transportation from my place in SA. The antenna is a KLM KT34A and is a 4 element 3 (14, 21 and 28 MHz.) band yagi. The antenna is complete and in pieces behind my shed. The boom is 4" dia and 16 feet long the width is 24 feet and it weighs 56 lbs (sorry about the imperial measures as it is American.) I guess you could point it to the sky!!

Regards,

Jerry.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-10-2006, 02:10 AM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Wow! Mighty generous offer there Jerry. Let me make a few calls and see if my people in SA would be willing to detour on the way up here. I'll get back to you when i find out mate.

Cheers and thanks!!

Baz.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-10-2006, 10:12 AM
74tuc
Registered User

74tuc is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sandy Creek(Sth.Aust.)
Posts: 153
No problem at all Barry. My amateur radio days are over! I also have part of a tower that came to grief but it could be fixed - You could take that if you want.

Jerry.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-10-2006, 07:09 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Problem. I am under the impression that if you want to tune a peice of wire to a frequency, then the calculation is 300, divided by mhz, then divided by 4 to give you the length of wire for quarter wavelength.

This guy has an antenna where he wants to listen to 21mhz. His diagram says the loop is 170mm, but im sure its a type error and he means 170 cm. Look at the photo to see the size. Even so, with the above calculation, the bandwidth works out at a little over 14 metres, of which a quarter wave is 3.57 metres. At 170 cm, how can his antenna possibly receive 21mhz?

I have built something similar, (third photo) based on his measurements and am now wondering if I have wasted my time and materials.

Confused.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (radiojove1_copy_small.jpg)
55.3 KB46 views
Click for full-size image (antenna_construct_small.jpg)
23.7 KB85 views
Click for full-size image (DSC01160.JPG)
146.6 KB121 views
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-10-2006, 10:49 AM
Dujon's Avatar
Dujon
SKE

Dujon is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Blaxland, N.S.W.
Posts: 634
Barry, it will work. After all, any piece of wire is an aerial. The efficiency of the design though (without me going too deeply into the subject) I would think highly questionable. As best I can see the design shown does not have any means of 'peaking' any received signal, never mind a proper matching network.

In a way radio aerials are like telescopes. The more (properly designed and constructed) wire you have up there the better the results. This though means properly matched impedance between aerial and receiver/transmitter to achieve maximum benefit from whatever aerial is involved. Some aerials are directional - meaning they favour a particular area of the sky relative to themselves. This need not be directly 'in front' of the construct. Dipoles, for instance, tend to have lobes which extend to the 'side' while long wires tend to favour the end of the wires.

In your case, using 21MHz, this becomes rather awkward, particularly as you (ideally) need some sort of altitude control and a method of azimuth adjustment as well. Nevertheless, Jerry's tri-bander I would think would be better than the Jovian system as it, because of its design, has something like 3dBd gain (that's double the signal but about one half of an 'S' point on a calibrated meter) over a dipole and, to boot, is easier to orient. It also has the benefit of rejecting signals received from other directions.

Sorry for the waffle.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-10-2006, 06:04 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Thats ok mate. Believe it or not, u actually make a bit of sense, so thank you!

I was wondering if I constructed the same antenna, but dimension it according to 21mHz/300 to give me a 14.2 metre bandwidth, then quarter that to give me a front wire diameter of 3.57 metres, which is what I am thinking it should be... then put a larger reflector behind to cover the new diameter. Would this work better?

Barry

p.s. below is a pic of my borrowed receiver.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (DSC01235.JPG)
112.5 KB91 views
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-10-2006, 08:06 PM
74tuc
Registered User

74tuc is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sandy Creek(Sth.Aust.)
Posts: 153
Antenna

Hi Chaps,

The KLM beam is actually 7db over a dipole in the middle of the 21MHz. band, it will take a bit of a hit at 21.9Mhz but one could try and re-tune it making it shorter is easier than making it longer!!

Those DDRR antennas need to be very very well constructed to perform efficiently because they are very short antennas. The ironmongery that one sees (loop etc.) is actually "top load" that is also used as a matching section, it doesn't have to be circular - it can be square (easier to construct). The antenna is actually the metal piece that joins the loop to the ground plane. The loop in this type of antenna does not radiate. The radiation pattern is omnidirectional and the antenna needs a good ground plane.

Cheers and beers,

Jerry.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-10-2006, 09:50 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
So....to cut a long story short, I am new to radio,s frequencies and all that. Just going off the pictures and measurements others have given me. Im better with my hands than my brain.
So tell me, if you know, what do I have to do to my antenna to make it work? Modify the existing? I have plenty of materials and I can whip up another in a matter of an hour.

A simple mud map drawing would be good if you can scribble one up. No symbols please as I havent the foggiest what they mean.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 04-10-2006, 10:21 AM
Dujon's Avatar
Dujon
SKE

Dujon is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Blaxland, N.S.W.
Posts: 634
Sorry, Jerry, I mis-read that as a three element tri-bander, not four. Are you sure that's not 7dbi? That sounds more reasonable - but I'm not familiar with the KLM (apart from the fact that they are a commercial unit of some repute) so I'll stand corrected. Incidentally, is that a trapped unit or, like a rather good and extremely well constructed Japanese unit I worked on some twenty years ago and whose manufacturer's name escapes me (TET?), all done with smoke and mirrors (capacitive and inductive coupling/matching mechanisms).

Barry, stick with what you have and see how it works, or grab Jerry's offer, is my advice. Some years ago I used an array designed for 144 MHz and consisting of two horizontally polarised 13 element Yagi type aerials vertically stacked and rotatable only in the azimuth. Even though the main lobe for reception and transmission was 'frontwards' and relatively narrow, when I swung the array towards the direction of the sun the background noise received was significantly higher.

Last edited by Dujon; 04-10-2006 at 10:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-10-2006, 08:50 AM
74tuc
Registered User

74tuc is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sandy Creek(Sth.Aust.)
Posts: 153
I'll be back!!

Hi Chaps,

I will post a proper reply tonight.

This page timed out on metwo times and alot of my typing disappeared into the ether.

Sorry about that.

Jerry.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-10-2006, 09:30 AM
Dujon's Avatar
Dujon
SKE

Dujon is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Blaxland, N.S.W.
Posts: 634
Ooh aah, now I'm totally embarrassed - I missed the whole of the first 'page' of this thread. My apologies for repeating what has already been said.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-10-2006, 10:05 PM
74tuc
Registered User

74tuc is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sandy Creek(Sth.Aust.)
Posts: 153
Hello Barry and John,

Rodger on missing the first page of the last post I now repeat it:
1. Yes John your question about the gain being 7db over isotropic is valid, my measurements were not done "really" scientifically merely comparing signals over the long path from Alice to the UK where the signals were consistently S8 to 5db over S9 with 100W.

2. Back to the Astronomy antennas:

Here is a nice site : http://www.radiosky.com/ here they said that the storms on Jupiter may be easily observed using a dipole antenna - Looks as if your path is right Barry and whats more I believe that you will be successful in this project - I might even have a go myself if I can lay my hands on a receiver.

3. Here is a dipole antenna that is very easily constructed. The dipole was calculated for 21,9MHz. This dipole is about 5% shorter because of the matching system I have chosen. It is mounted close to the ground so that it will direct most of its energy upwards.

It is stretched between two timber posts the nice part about this antenna is that it may be very easily modified for circular polarisation (installment #2).

Dipole antenna (receive only) for 21.9MHz.

|<------------------------------6.5M----------------------------->|
|<------------3.25M--------->|
|<-----1.5M--->| |<-----1.5M-->|
==============0==================== =====0============
| |
__0_____________.X._____________0__
^ | |
| | | <-------- 300 ohm lead
| |-|-|-| (on balun)
Sliding | | | <-- 300 ohm to 75 ohm TV balun.
contact | |--|--| (from DSE/Tandy/TV shop)
(welding rod) |
|
|
| 50 ohm / 75 ohm mismatch
|
|----------> To Rx.

1. Construct the antenna in bare copper wire
a single length of 6.5 M. and two 2M lengths.
(electrical earthing wire is good).
2. The matching section consists of 2 wires parallel with
the dipole separated from the elements by 100mm and a TV balun.
Use drilled electrical conduit(120mm x 12.5mm dia) as
the insulating spacers - 6 per side (say).
Use 2 pieces of brass welding rod each 120mm long with eyes
formed on the ends - these are the sliding contacts.

3. Start construction by getting a piece of 50mm dia. electrical conduit
200mm long and drill a hole throuh the conduit 20mm from the top for
the antenna wire to pass through. Drill 2 pairs of holes
(diametrically opposite) and 100mm below each of the previous holes.
The holes in each pair are 15 mm apart and are used to terminate
the matching wires.

Pass the antenna wire through the top holes in the conduit
and fix the wire so that the conduit is at the half way point
and cannot slide up or down the wire.
Fix the matching wires by passing them through the 15mm spaced holes
then twisting them - provides a strong mechanical joint and a good
insulator in the centre to which you attach the TV balun
and the co-axial cable.

You now have a piece of conduit to which are fixed 3 pieces of wire;
the continuous antenna wire and the two matching wires being
electrically separated.
Next thread the spacers through the wires then the brass rod.
The antenna should look like a long piece of wire with the conduit
in the centre and two ladders, one on each side.
Install the balun. The 300 ohm leads connect to the matching section as
shown and the balun is fixed to the centre conduit.
Connect the co-axial cable to the balun and fix the cable to the centre
conduit with a cable clamp. The antenna is now ready for installation.
4. Mount the antenna so that it runs N-S and 3.3M above the ground
using insulated (wood / fibre glass) posts.

5. To adjust; connect the antenna to the radio tuned to 21.9 MHz (approx.)
Adjust the tap spacing (shown for example at 1.5M) symmetrically until
the received noise is at a maximum. These rods are slid back and forth
symmetrically while monitoring the receiver noise when the noise peaks
you have a good match.
When the best match is found cut off excess wire from the matching wires
re-test the antenna then tidy up the job and that's it!

Kind Regards,

Jerry.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-10-2006, 10:08 PM
74tuc
Registered User

74tuc is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sandy Creek(Sth.Aust.)
Posts: 153
It looks as if this form destroyed my formatting!

I'll try again (sigh).

Jerry.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-10-2006, 09:56 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Jerry, top effort mate! I am looking into it. So much to do, so little time. I am quite excited about all this new stuff I am gaining knowledge and interest in. I had a bit of a listen on my receiver today, hooked up to the new antenna. I tuned in a few frequencies between 18 and 21.9 mHz. Dunno what Im listening for but I reckon if I keep doing it, I will start to recognise certain sounds very quickly.

I would love to see a bit more on the plans you posted there. I don't understand too much of it yet, but enough to get your drift. Pictures say a thousand words and all that.

Whats a balun? Why 300ohm lead? Is that the coax cable from antenna to radio? I am using 50 ohm at present.I have wire, poles of all descriptions, conduit, and can get my hands on coax and fittings readily. And all the tools I'll ever need. Ready to start building antennas!

Again, thanks Jerry and top effort. This site is a brilliant forum for us nerds as everyone is helpful and forthcoming!

Baz.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-10-2006, 10:03 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Cool

By the way Jerry, Im afraid I may have to decline for now, your very generous offer on the antenna. I have some issues here with available space and the observatory is gaining enough attention from passers by as it is. I need to keep my antennas down to a reasonable size to avoid drawing too much attention and creating an eye-sore.

Thanks anyway,

Baz
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-10-2006, 05:12 PM
74tuc
Registered User

74tuc is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sandy Creek(Sth.Aust.)
Posts: 153
Hello Barry,

Last things first - OK on the antenna. It is a large beast and uses a bit of real estate. Btw antenna builders think that antennas are wonderful (and they are!) but there is a section of the community (wives, councils and non-believers) who think otherwise.

Re:Baluns. The word Balun is made from the words BALanced to UNbalanced.
A balun is actually a BALanced to UNbalanced transformer.

What is balanced and unbalanced?

The best way to explain it is in thinking about our normal 240V power. One wire, the neutral, is connected to ground at the power station and the active reach us, via sundry transformers,directly. This is an example of an UNBALANCED system - one wire is at earth potential.

Now, you can get a transformer that converts the 240V mains to 12V
some of these transformers also have a centre tap (12V with 3 wires labelled 6-0-6) If the centre tap is connected to ground then you have 2 wires (each is an "active") and the potential between each "active" and ground is 6V.
- this is a balanced system.

If you connected one of the wires(other than the centre tap) to ground then you have 2 voltages (groung to centre ... 6V and ground to other terminal ... 12V) - this is an unbalanced system.

What about the Dipole antenna? One of the points with di-pole antennas is that they are two pieces of wire in the air (I'm stating the obvious to make a point) neither of which is connected to ground. Notice
that it is balanced with respect to ground - just like our transformer - 2 "actives" !! This dipole will present a balanced load to a transmitter.
So to feed a dipole you must present it with a balanced feed.

Yes, people do connect a co-axial cable directly to the di-pole but this is not the best. Notice that the co-axial cable is an unbalanced cable (the outer is connected to ground). Yes this works, but anything works when you receive powerful signals (Rabbit ear antennas work well in the city but badly if at all in the country).

The next thing is matching:

The antenna picks-up some of the transmitted power and feeds it to the receiver - here is the important part: The receiver input is designed to look like a resistor of 52 ohms (or 75 ohms if you like!). For the receiver to get the max power from the antenna the antenna must also have a resistance of 52 ohms (or 75 ohms) this is called matching the antenna to the receiver. If there is a mismatch then the amount of received power available to the rx will be reduced and there is no way that it can be recovered!!

Now a dipole antenna will "look like" 72 ohms (and balanced!) but that is under some strict conditions. A lot of the time it will not be 72 ohms.
When it is close to the ground or near other "antennas" the resistance will drop.

We now get back to baluns - the balun is a transformer OK! If you put a resistor on the input the output also looks like a resistor. Depending on the design of the balun the input and output resistance will "look" the same (52 ohms in - 52 ohms out) except that the input balanced and the output will be balanced - this is a 1:1 balun. You can have a 4:1 balun in which case 300 Ohms on one end gives 75 Ohms on the other end - notice 75 Ohms matches
a standard co-axial cable (unbalanced) and 300 Ohms matches a standard 300 Ohm TV ribbon (balanced). Most Tv antennas have these 4:1 (75 to 300 Ohm) baluns - have a look at yours. The length of 300 Ohm ribbon on the balun is quite short (100 to 150mm) - enough to connect
it to the antenna elements after that its all coax. to your TV.

Hope that answers:
" ... Whats a balun? Why 300ohm lead? ... "

And finally, A dipole (if split in the centre) will have a range of resistances from say 40 ohms in the centre to many thousands of ohms at the tip. So using the matching method Iv'e chosen you can adjust the antenna for a perfect match. A single piece(unbroken) of wire fed the way I've drawn is also a dipole.

Why do we need a good match? To get the max signal to the receiver - the signal's are low enough as it stands.

Antenna diagram? Next post - need a cuppa after this!

Cheers and beers,

Jerry .
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-10-2006, 06:49 PM
Doug
Registered User

Doug is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 645
G'day Jerry, you said: "When it is close to the ground or near other "antennas" the resistance will drop." And that is very true. Oh, and you omitted to point out that the feed point impedence of a 'folded dipole will be 300 ohms. I believe that was the primary reason for 4:1 baluns and 300 ohm ribbon, as opposed to an open wire feedline; ie. market driven with the advent of TV. But certainly matching with a short length of 300 ohm ribbon is both sound and popular. But getting back to your point as quoted above, I wonder if you have ever placed an impedence bridge on the imput terminals of the average TV yagi? I have not, however, I have assumed (rightly, I believe) that the impedence will be very low, maybe tending toward 15-20 Ohms. If this is correct then using a 4:1 balun on a TV antenna would be very lossy. I live in a lowish field strength area for both vhf and uhf TV, yet by omitting the balun and taking the coax direct the the antenna via a weather loop, I have for the past 20 or so years enjoyed perfect noise free reception (with the minor exception of ch 2 occasionally).

Getting back to radio astronomy, it seems to me that rather than embroiling a novice in toooo much technical stuff, an antenna tuner might be a sound investment; depending on the budget of course. A random wire can be tuned for optimum reception on a variety of bands, or a poorly matched dipole or other, and this might suffice until a deeper commitment is considered justified. Andrews don't seem to have anything under $199, but I'm sure that there will be other suppliers with lower priced (lower power) options.

Cheers,
Doug
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-10-2006, 07:04 PM
Doug
Registered User

Doug is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 645
Or, there is the MFJ 902 antenna tuner for $189 @ http://www.gccomm.com.au/products/tuners-mfj.asp

cheers,
Doug
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 04:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement