The AM Forum
May 05, 2024, 06:20:05 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Low Profile Electrically Short AM Vertical Approved by FCC  (Read 5370 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« on: December 15, 2005, 12:34:29 PM »

The KinStar antenna claims a radiating efficiency that is 98% that of a quarter wave tower with a vertical height that is 67% less than that of the quarter wave tower and with a wide bandwidth.  Full radial ground system (120 quarterwave radials).

http://www.kintronic.com/site/systems/kinstar.asp

http://www.star-h.com/publications/ieee2002.pdf
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
flintstone mop
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5047


« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2005, 06:40:51 PM »

Looks interesting Don,
It would still be a problem for guys who have small lots. Many people were surprised when I told them I was using a 31 foot high vertical about 3 years ago. It was the Unihat vertical, he has a 45 foot version out now that he claims will out perform a full sized vertical for the broadcasters.
I remember a GAP antenna that was 45 feet high and that was a 'dummy load'  Tongue
on 160M.
You need to get on the air more often
fred
Logged

Fred KC4MOP
W2PFY
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13290



« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2005, 09:58:35 AM »

Is the Unihat vertica still  manufactured? Great site Don Grin That company has some great stuff.

Logged

The secrecy of my job prevents me from knowing what I am doing.
Vortex Joe - N3IBX
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1639


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2005, 10:15:10 AM »

Don,
      Interesting looking antenna. I'm skeptical of the manufacturers claim that it's performance is 98 percent or so equal to a regulation ground plane; and would think it's probably more in line with a folded "unipole" of the same dimensions. There's certainly nothing wrong with that.

It would be interesting to work someone who actually bought one.
Logged

Joe Cro N3IBX

Anything that is Breadboarded,Black Crackle, or that squeals when you tune it gives me MAJOR WOOD!
Bacon, WA3WDR
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 881



« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2005, 11:21:53 AM »

Efficiency may be close to that of a 1/4 wave, but the vertical pattern will be less flattened than that of a 1/4 wave, so signal along the ground will not be quite as strong as radiation efficiency suggests, and skywave will be a little stronger, which will reduce nighttime distant coverage quality slightly.  Still, it won't be much different from a 1/4 wave.

Of course, bandwidth will be less than that of a 1/4 wave antenna.  At 1680 KHz that may not be much of an issue, but down around 550 KHz it will matter.  The cage idea should help.

But aren't most BCB antennas a bit shortened, especially stations below about 800 KHz?  Seems to me that they all have top-hat stuff using the top section of the tower guys to tune them to frequency.
Logged

Truth can be stranger than fiction.  But fiction can be pretty strange, too!
K1JJ
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8886


"Let's go kayaking, Tommy!" - Yaz


« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2005, 11:36:06 AM »

In the real whirl, for ham use, W2FMI has proved how well shortie [top loaded capacity hat] verticals can work on 40M.  These stand about 6' high or so

Also,  I know of a guy in NH who operates a four square of phased verticals in the DX 75M Window. They are 1/8 wave, loaded with coils in the center I think.  He consistently out hears the full sized vertical guys as well as some with wire Yagis into Eu.

These are kinda hambone antidotal stories, I'll admit, but modeling shows if the vertical is shorter than optimum, but with a good cleared area, good radial system and efficient loading and feed, they can be very close to a full sized perfect system.

I'd agree with Bacon about the change in pattern. No free lunches. It's not hard to match something and even make it efficient. But making it produce a desirable pattern in both the vertical and horizontal planes usually takes physical height and length, with few shortcuts.

If it were not the case, then everyone would have done it years ago and it wud be the standard today. [The exception is the Gotham Vertical - a mystifying oracle]

T
Logged

Use an "AM Courtesy Filter" to limit transmit audio bandwidth  +-4.5 KHz, +-6.0 KHz or +-8.0 KHz when needed.  Easily done in DSP.

Wise Words : "I'm as old as I've ever been... and I'm as young as I'll ever be."

There's nothing like an old dog.
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2005, 02:46:42 PM »

Efficiency may be close to that of a 1/4 wave, but the vertical pattern will be less flattened than that of a 1/4 wave, so signal along the ground will not be quite as strong as radiation efficiency suggests, and skywave will be a little stronger, which will reduce nighttime distant coverage quality slightly.  Still, it won't be much different from a 1/4 wave.

That might be an advantage for ham use, since most of us don't work each other by groundwave.  I think there may be three active stations within groundwave range of me on 160.  The increased skywave would  be an adavantage for the clear channel stations in reaching the distant edges of their secondary (skywave) coverage areas, at the expense of their primary local groundwave coverage.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
ve6pg
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1108



« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2005, 08:51:32 PM »

...I KNOW MY MULTI-BAND/NO TRAP VERTICAL WERKS FB...CHEAP TO BUILD TOO....TIM....SK..


* 160-6 VERT.jpg (93.22 KB, 850x1100 - viewed 455 times.)
Logged

...Yes, my name is Tim Smith...sk..
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone © 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.116 seconds with 18 queries.