|
VK1OD is located in Canberra in the Australian Capital
Territory, roughly in the centre of the south east corner of Australia where
well over half of Australia's population reside, as illustrated in the
map to the right.
A little hard to see on the map, Canberra is located about 110Km inland from the coast
within the (small) Australian Capital Territory border that is just
visible.
|
|
|
The table shows the state capital cities and the path parameters for
7MHz communications at 1700 local in March / April 2002 with SSN=100.
Note that radiation angles from 25 to 70 degrees suit these cities,
but radiation angles up to 80 degrees are used for contacts at 100Km. |
|
City
|
Population
(Million) |
Distance |
Bearing |
Radiation
angle |
| Sydney |
4.1 |
242 |
51 |
65 |
| Melbourne |
3.5 |
461 |
232 |
47 |
| Brisbane |
1.5 |
942 |
24 |
25 |
| Adelaide |
1.1 |
958 |
269 |
26 |
|
| The requirement can be simply met by an
antenna with approximately omni-directional characteristics.
Situation in a built up area indicates selection of a horizontally
polarised antenna for lowest receive noise.
A dipole mounted low to the ground with its legs sloped downwards
from the centre was chosen as a reasonably omni-directional horizontal
antenna.
A dipole mounted close to ground and with the legs sloping downward
from the centre tends more toward an omni-directional pattern rather
than the classic pattern for a dipole in free space. The figure at the
right shows the modeled pattern from EZNEC. |
 |
|
RG6 was chosen as a transmission line. The table shows the key parameters for
a half-wave of the alternative coaxial transmission lines considered.
Note that the loss of 17.37m of RG6, although greater than for 13.98m
of RG213, is almost identical in loss per meter of length. An
alternative transmission line configuration of a half wave of ladder line with a
cored balun, but it would exhibit slightly worse losses overall than
the RG6 which is easier to install and relatively independent of
precipitation. |
|
Cable
|
Length |
Matched
Loss |
Loss with
VSWR=1.5 |
| RG-58C/U |
13.98 |
0.51dB |
0.56dB |
| RG213 |
13.98 |
0.23dB |
0.25dB |
| RG59 |
13.98 |
0.40dB |
0.43dB |
| RG6 |
17.37 |
0.30dB |
0.32dB |
|
| Whilst the centre feed impedance of a half
wave dipole in free space is just over 70 ohms, installation of the
dipole close to lossy earth and sloping the legs down from the centre
have the effect of reducing the feed impedance to around 65 ohms which
will cause standing waves on a 75 ohm feeder (VSWR=1.15). The matching strategy is to shorten the dipole to excite a VSWR(75)
of 1.5 in the RG6, and cut the cable at the most convenient length where the impedance is transformed
to 50+j0. The first point at which the impedance is 50+j0 is at 3 metres
from the feed point which doesn't suit my installation. This condition repeats every half
wave or 17.5m, so the next point is at 20.5 metres, which does suit. The Smith
Chart illustrates the matching scheme. The model shows a gain of
5.5dBi at 60 deg elevation on the major lobe. The feed system has quite
low overall loss, resulting in 92% of the transmitter power reaching the
antenna. The achievement of a 50 load impedance for the transmitter,
allows the transmitter to achieve rated output without using a lossy ATU. These
are design model figures, which are the starting point for
implementation. Implementation will be influenced by real ground
conditions, proximity of other structures etc. It will be necessary to
jiggle leg length and transmission line length to achieve low VSWR. Note that
there are many types of RG6 and the velocity factor varies with the
construction. The actual length of the transmission line will depend on the
velocity factor. An EzNEC model of the antenna / transmission line is available for download. |
|
Frequency |
7.080MHz |
|
Height of feedpoint |
11.00m |
|
Leg length |
10.03m |
|
Leg slope |
30 deg |
|
Centre Z |
60-j26ohms |
|
Transmission line |
RG6 (Belden B1189A) |
|
Transmission line VF |
0.83 |
|
Transmission line Zo |
75ohms |
|
Transmission line length |
21.1m (216 degrees) |
|
Transmission line loss (mismatched) |
0.41dB |
|
Load Z (at tx) |
50+j0ohms |
|
Bandwidth |
7.000MHz - 7.150MHz for VSWR<1.3 |
|
Power handling |
At 400W pX, the voltage at the
voltage maximum is well within specified voltage breakdown limits, and
at 120pY, dissipation is about 1W/m at the current maximum.
(Stated power levels are the maximum permitted under Australian
licencing.) |
|
EIRP for 100W transmitter |
325W at 60 deg elevation broadside (best),
220W at 60 deg elevation end-on (worst) |
|
| A Smith Chart view of the matching scheme is
shown to the right. The values plotted here are as constructed and
measured rather than modeled as above, so there is some slight
discrepancy. (Click on the picure for a larger, readable, printable
image).
The chart is normalised to 75 ohms. The desired normalised impedance
at the transmitter end of the line is 0.66+j0. The normalised feedpoint
impedance is 0.82-j0.29, and plotting the constant VSWR circle, it
intercepts the real axis at Z'=0.66 at a length of 0.94 wavelengths or
34° of line. This length is not practical, so it is extended by 180°
to give a line length of 214°. |
 |
Comparison with ATU / 50 ohm coax / Balun
The following compares the design RG6 configuration with the very popular ATU
/ 50 ohm coax / cored Balun solution.
| |
RG6 |
ATU + RG58/CU + Balun |
ATU + RG213/U + Balun |
| ATU |
Not used |
0.4dB |
0.4dB |
| Transmission line |
0.41dB |
0.77dB |
0.35dB |
| Balun |
Included in transmission line
loss above |
0.3dB |
0.3dB |
| Total |
0.41dB |
1.47dB |
1.05dB |
| Cost |
$10 |
$468 |
$520 |
Other bands
The antenna is designed to be a single band antenna, that is simple and
provides excellent performance for contacts up to 1000Km.
It is frequently suggested that the antenna will load up ok on other bands with
any reasonable ATU. One needs to be aware that just because an ATU indicates a
good VSWR, that is not an adequate indication that all is working well. Three
scenarios are analysed below.
3.6MHz
The modelled driving point impedance is 7.5-j770 ohms. It is fed by 21.1m of RG6,
which has a loss of 0.25dB at 3.6MHz. There is 16dB loss on the transmission line
in the
mismatched state, impedance seen at the ATU end of the transmission line is
3.43+j35.52 ohms.
A T match should transform this to 50 ohms with a loss of around 3dB. Modelled antenna gain at 3.6MHz is about 3dB lower at 60deg elevation compared to
performance at 7.1MHz.
So, all up, it is 22dB or so worse in performance than at 7.1MHz - good
enough reason to not use it!
10.1MHz
The modelled driving point impedance is 314+j597 ohms. It is fed by 21.1m of RG6,
which has a loss of 0.41dB at 10.1MHz. There is 3.1 dB loss on the transmission line
in the
mismatched state, impedance seen at the ATU end of the transmission line is
10.80+j46.97 ohms.
A T match should transform this to 50 ohms with a loss of around 0.3dB. Modelled antenna gain at 10.1MHz is about the same at 60deg elevation compared to
performance at 7.1MHz.
So, all up, it is 3.2 dB or so worse in performance than at 7.1MHz - perhaps
tolerable.
22.2MHz
The modelled driving point impedance is 79-j160 ohms. It is fed by 21.1m of RG6,
which has a loss of 0.6dB at 21.2MHz. There is 1.7 dB loss on the transmission line
in the
mismatched state, impedance seen at the ATU end of the transmission line is
35.90+j71.57 ohms.
A T match should transform this to 50 ohms with a loss of around 0.1dB. Modelled antenna gain at 22.1MHz is about 2dB better at 60deg elevation compared to
performance at 7.1MHz, though more directional.
Although this is harmonically related to the design frequency, the
combination of dipole shortening and using the transmission line as an impedance
transformer prevent the use of this antenna on 22.2MHz without an ATU.
So, all up, it is similar in performance to 7.1MHz on its major lobe, but
more directional.
Reports
Achievement of the best VSWR depends on the time one is prepared to spend
trimming the antenna legs and cable length. In my case, I abandoned efforts when
the VSWR at 7.1MHZ was 1.1. The VSWR rises to 1.4 at 7.000MHZ and 7.2MHz. Whilst
pursuing very low VSWR mid band might seem a waste of time, the benefit is
mainly in obtaining the best working bandwidth.
Signal reports indicate that the antenna is working as intended. Receive
signal strength and reports received from other stations are consistent with
similarly configured other local stations, and the paths commonly encountered.
Though I have worked the odd North American, European, and Japanese station
with reasonable strengths, the antenna is optimised for contacts ranging up to
1500Km, and works very well over that range.
Summary
The advantages of this design are: