• You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.

Base V verses inverted V dipole

TruckerKevin

KD9NTD
Nov 9, 2017
234
142
53
58
Buckner, Illinois
www.qrz.com
this is just a quick but curious question that I’ve been unable to find a solid answer for, whenever I research a V dipole almost all the information I pull up is an inverted V.

What would be the plus, or the negative of an upright V verses it being inverted? Why does everyone seem to favor it being inverted? I could understand if one was stinging it by wire in a tree why they would want it inverted, but is there any repercussions if you have the ability and the real estate to put it up right?
 

It's my understanding that the majority of the energy is produced at the feedpoint and lessens toward the ends. With an inverted V, the feedpoint is much higher than in a regular V, which would be desirable.

Now the experts can chime in and we'll both learn. (y)
 
Another consideration might be, what happens if we don't change the height of the feed point and then compare /\ to V?
 
Another consideration might be, what happens if we don't change the height of the feed point and then compare /\ to V?

I would think the regular V theorectically would be a little better since the portion of the antenna doing most of the radiating would be at a slightly higher height, although the difference might be negligible.

Is that something you can model?
 
I used my Inverted V model with the elements down, and raised the radials up at the same degree*

I made no changes to the model with the elements up, even though the match did change little.

Below are the pattern overlays for both. There is a difference, but I doubt you could tell...just using your radio.
 

Attachments

  • Inverted V with up vs. down elements.pdf
    508.4 KB · Views: 16
I noticed in my models included the mast with a Feed Line. Just in case that made some difference regarding the question, I re-did both models with no mast and I get similar gain results.

For what it's worth however, I noticed that the model with the elements raised up showed a maximum gain angle of 13* degrees above the horizon while the model with the elements pointed down showed 15* degrees. This shows up on the overlays I posted above, but I failed to make a point about it.
 
As you said, one would probably never notice the difference, especially if both were mounted high and in the clear. Mounted lower, say at 15' near a house, the regular V would definitely be the antenna of choice.
 
As you said, one would probably never notice the difference, especially if both were mounted high and in the clear. Mounted lower, say at 15' near a house, the regular V would definitely be the antenna of choice.
Yes, true. But with the extra mast / support requirements it may not be viable all the time. If 2x whips instead of wire are used it would be a great little semi-portable around the house and camping setup. Hmm, I think MFJ has something like that for HF. A quick google search and if you lay it horzontal, it becomes a directional antenna with a claim 3 dBd.
 
Last edited:
Yes, true. But with the extra mast / support requirements it may not be viable all the time. If 2x whips instead of wire are used it would be a great little semi-portable around the house and camping setup. Hmm, I think MFJ has something like that for HF. A quick google search and if you lay it horzontal, it becomes a directional antenna with a claim 3 dBd.

Right as rain.
I currently have an inverted V wire dipole up and tire quickly at the thought of converting it to a regular V. Plus, I don't think my wife would go for two additional masts even higher than the one I have, so it'll stay as is. :D
 
I would think the regular V theorectically would be a little better since the portion of the antenna doing most of the radiating would be at a slightly higher height,....

Is that something you can model?

did you type that wrong?, it's exactly backwards,

The inverted V has the highest feedpoint where the most power is radiated, and the lower ends (closer to the earth) can lower the impedance, enabling a better "match".
 
did you type that wrong?, it's exactly backwards,

The inverted V has the highest feedpoint where the most power is radiated, and the lower ends (closer to the earth) can lower the impedance, enabling a better "match".

I was referring to the feedpoints being the same height as Marconi suggested in Post #5.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Marconi

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • dxBot:
    Tucker442 has left the room.
  • @ BJ radionut:
    LIVE 10:00 AM EST :cool:
  • @ Charles Edwards:
    I'm looking for factory settings 1 through 59 for a AT 5555 n2 or AT500 M2 I only wrote down half the values feel like a idiot I need help will be appreciated