[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]
Re: S-Band Antenna Comparisons, etc.
- Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] S-Band Antenna Comparisons, etc.
- From: Joseph V Murray <k0vty@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 23:10:33 CST
Circular polarization requires a solid dish surface. A small mesh will
work . The Bar-B-Que does not support circular polarization. To test
the dish surface, a simple test of rotating a Rx dipole in front of a Tx
dish antenna on the same axis as the dish will allow detection of the
polarized waves . The polarity of the prime feed antenna used with
the Bar-B-Que dish must be aligned with the rods making up the dish
surface. Another thing about the Bar-BQue dish, It is truncated ,
which means that the beam radiated form that dish will have the shape of
a beavers tail. Or canoe paddle.
These facts can be verified in " Antennas" 2 nd by John Kraus >
I hope this helps
Joe K0VTY
On Sun, 07 Jan 2001 15:14:10 -0600 "David M. Tipton, PhD"
<tiptond@dnrconsulting.com> writes:
>I don't think so. If I understand correctly, it sees it as a solid,
>and
>not a "Grid" at all.
>
>Dave
>
>At 16:44 1/7/01 -0500, you wrote:
>>I only meant that the linear grid cannot efficiently support circular
>>polarization. If a circularly polarized feed is used on a solid
>>reflector, it induces circular currents on that reflector. These
>>currents can't flow on a bar-b-que reflector because of its parallel
>>wire structure. Isn't that correct?
>>
>>Bob
>>
>>
>>"David M. Tipton, PhD" wrote:
>> >
>> > Cliff, you are incorrect. The linear polarisation is determined
>by the
>> > "Dipole" Element in the center and not by the direction of the
>grid.
>> >
>> > The reflector has nothing to do with it.
>> >
>> > Dave
>> > At 14:17 1/7/01 -0500, you wrote:
>> > >Cliff,
>> > >
>> > >The bar-b-que style of dish that Jerry is using can, I believe,
>only
>> > >support linear polarization, in the direction of the bar-b-que
>rods. It
>> > >could support any polarization, however, if it was lined with
>metal
>> > >screen. That shouldn't be hard to do, by the way.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Clifford Buttschardt wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Jerry, it is not clear to me if the dish antenna is linear or
>were you
>> > > > able to compare both with RHC? Truthfully, I have had a devil
>of a
>> time
>> > > > with the small dish and about ready to go to the helix
>regardless
>> of gain.
>> > > > Cliff K7RR
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Bob Snyder wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > I did some quick helix antenna runs using NEC. These runs
>use an
>> > > > > infinite backplane, so they are only approximations, but may
>be
>> useful
>> > > > > for comparisons. The 7-turn helix you describe (with 44 mm
>dia. i.e.
>> > > > > 1.106 wavelength circumference; and 37 mm spacing, i.e. 15
>degree
>> pitch)
>> > > > > has 11.9 dBi gain. The 16-turn helix (I assume it is built
>to
>> nominal 1
>> > > > > wavelength circumference and 12 deg pitch) has 14.8 dBi
>gain. The
>> > > > > parabolic reflector on the 7-turner may be enhancing it's
>gain
>> somewhat.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 73,
>> > > > > Bob KD1VV
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > K5OE@aol.com wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I did some antenna experiments this AM when AO-40 came
>over my
>> > > horizon (1200
>> > > > > > utc, MA=4.5). Those window-shopping the various options
>may be
>> > > interested in
>> > > > > > these observations. What can be determined from current
>> > > observations with
>> > > > > > respect to the final satellite configuration is subject to
>
>> considerable
>> > > > > > speculation: these observations were taken with a squint
>of
>> > > greater than 140
>> > > > > > degrees on AO-40's low gain antenna at low power. What
>one can
>> > > extrapolate
>> > > > > > to a favorable orbit, orientation, and squint, plus the
>change
>> to the
>> > > > > > high-gain antenna and the high power amplifier, is clearly
>just
>> > > speculative
>> > > > > > at this time.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > In a quasi-designed-experiment, I used several antenna and
>> > > downconverter
>> > > > > > combinations using a Drake 2880 and my Yaesu FT-100 as a
>> receiver, and
>> > > > > > recorded the results enumerated below. One unknown in my
>> > > measurement system
>> > > > > > is the accuracy of the meter on the Yaesu. I have
>previously
>> > > "calibrated" it
>> > > > > > using a variable power 2 m FM signal, but only in the
>crudest sense
>> > > (after
>> > > > > > all, I am an "amateur").
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 1. The 24 dBi dish antenna (bar-b-que style, borrowed
>from KK5DO),
>> > > does
>> > > > > > indeed offer a 12 dBi gain (2 full S-units) over my
>16-turn helix
>> > > (estimated
>> > > > > > at 12 dBi). This was consistent with-and-without a
>preamp. Note
>> > > to those
>> > > > > > without automatic antenna tracking: this antenna's
>beamwidth was
>> > > so narrow,
>> > > > > > that 12 dB of signal was lost in +/- 5 degrees of
>movement.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 2. The Conifer preamp does NOT provide the rated 10 dBi
>gain, but
>> > > appears
>> > > > > > much closer to 6 dBi (when close-coupled to the Drake).
>It was
>> > > difficult to
>> > > > > > judge the impact on S/N ratio with this setup, but I
>believe it was
>> > > > > > substantially improved, even though the noise floor is up
>6 dB
>> as well.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 3. At MA=18, I could detect the beacon with a coffee can
>and
>> > > preamp/Drake
>> > > > > > combination, but it did not move the S-meter. I could not
>hear the
>> > > beacon
>> > > > > > without the preamp.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 4. Using an unmodified Drake 2880, I could not detect the
>beacon
>> > > at 121.3xx
>> > > > > > MHz with both the dish and the preamp in line. This
>surprised
>> > > me. If I have
>> > > > > > the frequency conversion for the stock crystal wrong,
>please let me
>> > > know.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 5. In comparing the 16-turn helix I have been using for a
>month to
>> > > a much
>> > > > > > smaller one built for me by my friend Oleg, RV3TH, the two
>were
>> fairly
>> > > > > > comparable. The interesting thing is that helix is only
>> > > 7-turns! Oleg's
>> > > > > > helix employs some non-conventional metrics: the diameter
>is about
>> > > 44 mm and
>> > > > > > the turns spacing is about 37 mm, plus it uses a 100 mm
>> semi-parabolic
>> > > > > > reflector. I will report more on this after I completely
>> > > reverse-engineer it
>> > > > > > :-)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > For those interested in seeing the hardware, I have put a
>few
>> > > pictures of
>> > > > > > this equipment at:
>> > > > > > http://home.swbell.net/k5oe
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 73,
>> > > > > > Jerry, K5OE
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > ----
>> > > > > > Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of
>AMSAT-NA.
>> > > > > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to
>Majordomo@amsat.org
>> > > > > ----
>> > > > > Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of
>AMSAT-NA.
>> > > > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to
>Majordomo@amsat.org
>> > > > >
>> > >----
>> > >Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>> > >To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to
>Majordomo@amsat.org
>
>
>----
>Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
AMSAT Home