CB Antenna accessory: "Zing Ring"

KiethS said:

Thank you for the photo of your HF Screwdriver Antenna with Cap Hat added.
Your Cap Hat appears quite similar to the 6 element grounding add-on base I showed above, but instead of wedging between the coax and antenna coil, yours is somehow mounted on top. For the grounding star, it has a PL259 pass through, connecting the elements only the the outer shield, electrically. But if used as a cap hat, for THAT item, it would expose the SO239 (underside) pointing straight up, collecting rain.

Where did you buy your cap hat, or was it fabricated using a modified grounding base?

Click to expand...

The caphat is from DX Engineering. It's threaded on to a rigid mast similar to a Wilson or Hustler mast with 3/8 x 24 threads. It's just a hub with holes drilled out for the rods.

They sell a smooth bore hub designed to slip over the Hustler antenna but unless you modify the loading coil if used on a CB resonator, it won't tune up on that band but instead probably tune up on a lower band like 15 meters. That's exactly the purpose of a caphat, to decrease loading coil inductive losses with mobile antennas shorter than a 1/4 wavelength. With a non adjustable coil, the caphat will tune up on a band or 2 lower than orginal antenna design (assuming starting with a CB antenna) depending on the caphat size. Think of it like adding extra feet to the antenna height.

You can easily make your own coil with enameled wire and some PVC parts and antenna hardware to use a capacity hat on. I've done this myself and it works well even though it isn't as pretty like the mass produced antennas.

If you can find a used Hustler 6 meter mobile antenna (RM-6), it'll work perfect with a caphat on the CB band. These are no longer made but still show up on Ebay.

KiethS said:

Marconi, from your attached file, it appears the top hat somewhat lifts and separates the wave, perhaps shifting horizontal range.

Click to expand...

Kieth, thanks for your description of what you see in the very limited project I posted for Booty Monster. See below is my earlier post with the models to BM

CB Antenna accessory: "Zing Ring"

I just did enough to show my point to BM...that being...there is not much difference to be seen in the effective low angle part of these antenna patterns with the coil in the center of the radiator or up at the top near the top hat, as compared to a conventional 1/4 wave ground plane with none of these features. There is a difference no doubt but according to my models here...the differences are very small.

Kieth, after I read your comments I was curious what you were looking at, so I went back and checked the models. I found I did not describe them very well is one problem. Another problem is I used one model to make three additional models with different configurations, and in the process I did not verify the new models for accuracy or match.

Just now I did the models over and checked them all for a good match and for accuracy. I got a little different results going to the extra effort, but the differences are still very small and likely will not be detectable just using your radio. I also did not include a mast in these real Earth models and that too will make some difference in results, but I don't think the trend we see here will change.

I'm not sure I understand your observations as you intended, but three of the new models have a top hat and the standard 1/4 wave ground plane does not. All three of the models with top hats show the high angle part of the pattern as noticeably higher compared to the standard 1/4 wave. This is what I'm not sure about regarding your observations.

Below are all 4 models if you're interested. You can compare these results with those I posted to Booty Monster earlier. This time I have notes describing the titles and a brief description for how the antenna is constructed in this case. I also added overlays for each model and the active model is noted by an (*) asterisk beside the colored titles.

Reading about it is good for study, but I would keep my cash in my pocket.

Snow Bird, you reported above owning a Zing, Ring...can you give us a report on how you Zing, Ring worked out for you?

KiethS said:

I fully agree.
I've seen (mid-1970's) guys copycat their own ring of solid copper grounding wire.
But again, it was practice to mount it with a small stainless hose clamp onto the radiator.

Looking back at what they did, and referencing Marconi's charts, I can almost imagine why the layman CBer's of the day were looked down on by hams, for "trying any/everything" without so much as a theory to back it up.
For me, it puts to question many practices of the day, for instance... the dual foot long Hustler antennas that were supposedly "co-phased" on a sedan's rain gutters, despite being only about 4 ft separated. (I'd have to see that proven on a waveform simulator to believe it).

Click to expand...

The guys at FIRESTIK COMMUNICATIONS report they could make that co-phase distance work.

.

KiethS said:

Looking back at what they did, and referencing Marconi's charts, I can almost imagine why the layman CBer's of the day were looked down on by hams, for "trying any/everything" without so much as a theory to back it up.

Click to expand...

I don't think it was trying things that they didn't understand the theory, many ham's did that as well, it was more claiming the dummy load they came up with was great just because they happened to make a contact or three, while sitting at a truck stop surrounded by cars and trucks with CB antennas... OK, I'm being hyperbolic, but you get the point.

KiethS said:

For me, it puts to question many practices of the day, for instance... the dual foot long Hustler antennas that were supposedly "co-phased" on a sedan's rain gutters, despite being only about 4 ft separated. (I'd have to see that proven on a waveform simulator to believe it).

Click to expand...

Slowmover said:

The guys at FIRESTIK COMMUNICATIONS report they could make that co-phase distance work.

Click to expand...

They are still cophased, its just they don't work like some people think they work. Four feet apart, for example, will not give any noticeable gain in any direction, hell nine feet apart won't make any noticeable difference if your measuring device is an s-meter. If you want to see noticeable gain you really need to get near a half wavelength apart. There is also the fact that each of the cophased antennas will only have a ground plane on one side of them, towards the car, which puts their ground planed on opposite sides, which will also have an effect. This ground plane will also be inadequate, which will also have an effect. Ect. ect. ect.

In some people's minds they see two antennas in an optimal setup, and assume that is what will happen on a car, in fact any vehicle no matter what it is, which is nothing even like an optimal setup for said cophased antennas. Their is also a .pdf floating around that says that no matter the configuration, if you have two antennas you will get 3 dB gain over a single antenna. Unfortunately, it takes a lot to get around the BS. Its much easier in todays world with forums like this, but back in the day we didn't have said forums were the few that know what is going on could push back on the BS. Most operators simply didn't have access to people with actual knowledge.


The DB

back in the late 70s i tried the zing ring then tried making my own of different sizes,,, it made no difference,,,,, of course i was trying the one supposedly for 102 whips put at the magic number of 4' 6 inches from the mount,,,still learned my lesson, it is just something to sell and make money on for some one else,,,,

KiethS said:

For me, it puts to question many practices of the day, for instance... the dual foot long Hustler antennas that were supposedly "co-phased" on a sedan's rain gutters, despite being only about 4 ft separated. (I'd have to see that proven on a waveform simulator to believe it).

Click to expand...

I think your thread was talking primarily about mobile antennas and the models I posted were 36' feet high base station models.

Keith, I was addressing Boothmonster's comments back then, as he was making some claim about a coil being located right below a top hat on the Lightning Antennas GR45 mobile antenna. He said that doing such was bad design, it would not work right, and was wrong. He could be right too.

I've heard similar claims before, but I never heard anybody clearly explain why or how much difference it makes. I figured that BM was just repeating something he had heard or read. I also figured it would not be productive to ask him to explain his claim...so I thought I would make some models and put the GR45 antenna on top of a StarDuster GP radial setup and compare the GR45 radiator design to a full 1/4 wave radiator and see what my model results might suggest...regarding his claim.

On re-reading this thread I also noticed another difference between the models I posted that could have been confusing. I did not explain the difference back then...but one set of models had a mast included and the other set had no mast. If I get some energy today, maybe I'll take these same models and re-locate the radials a foot above the ground, placing the bottom of the radiator about 90" inches high, so the models will be closer to a mobile type setup. Then compare the GR45 vs a full 1/4 wave mobile type setup.

I would use a real mobile model object I've made for these comparisons instead of the Starduster radial setup, but the mobile object (vehicle body) requires lots of segments using Eznec modeling software, and the GR45 radiator with the coil consumes more than 1/2 of my segment limitation of 500 segments per model. Plus the radials give me more control over the ground plane effects vs the vehicle body.

Marconi said:

If I get some energy today, maybe I'll take these same models and re-locate the radials a foot above the ground, placing the bottom of the radiator about 90" inches high, so the models will be closer to a mobile type setup. Then compare the GR45 vs a full 1/4 wave mobile type setup.

Click to expand...

Keith my earlier models likely left the wrong impressions considering your thread is about mobile antennas.

Below are models of the GR45 and the 1/4 wave whip showing the radials at 1' foot above the Earth. Since these models use a radial setup instead of an image for a mobile vehicle for the ground plane...I titled these models "SMobile" standing for simulated mobile.

Model 1, is the GR45 as per dimension specs I took from my own antenna. With the 4 slanted down radials I use the antenna feed point sits about 91" inches above the ground.

Model 2, has a full 1/4 wave radiator above the radial setup at 91" inches above the ground. I changed the radials angle a bit in order to improve the match.

I also added two overlays to compare these differences.

This shows the difference in the pattern, angle, and performance between these two antennas when closer to the "Earth" ground like a mobile. Also notice the full 1/4 wave antenna shows a 1* degree lower angle than the shorter GR45 44" inch radiator, also likely due to the shorter radiator with a lower tip height.

Here is a mobile model with a full wave 1/4 wave whip on the center top of a Pickup Truck object I had. The whip is only 70" inches above Earth ground in this case and it looks obvious that height matters. I did this to compare the two different ground plane types used with these antennas closer to the ground.

We see differences in gain here, and a little difference in the maximum RF angle, but I'm not too sure the difference can be noticed just operating your two-way radio.

As I see things, it looks like the GR45 with its coil right below the Top Hat...has little-to-nothing to do with anything noted per BM's claim. However, I would still like an explanation and some proof for this idea.

The shorter GR45 with a coil and top hat close together does not perform quite as good as the longer whips...having nearly twice the working height.

Next, I won't modify the GR45 model with the coil in the middle of the radiator and see what difference that might make. With this set of models however, I might do it in a new thread making a link back to this thread.

I think this is a good topic needing more discussion as to what might happen when we move a tuning coil from the base of the antenna up to the middle and on up to near top.

Shadetree, thanks for your "Like" for this post. When you clicked the "Like Button" I got an alert. When I opened the thread...I noticed I made a gross mistake in my next to the last sentence. This post is just to clarify better what I meant to say.

I said this quote in error:

Marconi said:

Next, I won't modify the GR45 model with the coil in the middle of the radiator and see what difference that might make.

Click to expand...

In Bold highlight I meant to say:

Marconi said:

Next, I also won't to modify the GR45 model with the coil in the middle of the radiator and see what difference that might make.

Click to expand...

BTW, I never did get around to following-up on this project...I just forgot about the whole idea and your alert reminded me.

Thanks again,

Sorry, I'm getting' old.