• 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.

Homebrew Merlin Experiment

homer , have you considered swapping the merlin and dipole mounting locations ? i honestly wouldn't expect much difference . but in the interest of being fair ....... and just to eliminate the possibility of the dipole location benefiting a antenna there , and/or the merlin being in a location that possibly impaired it .... or a little of both .
 
Couple of things.
If an antenna is physically shorter than a 1/4 wave length then it will radiate in a less efficient manner than a 1/4 wave length antenna. Meaning it's radiation pattern will be lesser/smaller than the 1/4 wave's. It doesn't matter how much that antenna is 'loaded', it's radiation patter (shape/size) will not be the equivalent of a 1/2 wave antenna. That radiation pattern is physical length dependent. That's not difficult to see at all, try it with one of the modeling programs.
Just a guess, but I think that antenna on the red vehicle is about 6 feet tall. That's from guessing that the amber light is something like 8" tall. At best, it's a sort of close equivalent of a 1/4 wave antenna, not even close to a 1/2 wave (that assumes it's for 11 meters).
- 'Doc
 
Db, if you would like post up more of what was written about that antenna it may have something to teach some of us, or at least to show how this antenna type has been around for a good while.

OK, here is the full text from said book.

ARRL Antenna Book said:
coilcapacityhat.jpg

Fig. 1212 - Top-loaded antenna. A parallel-tuned circuit, independently resonant at the operating frequency, is required for coupling to the transmitter when the top loading is adjusted to bring a current minimum at the lower end of the antenna.

1213o.jpg

Fig. 1213 - Capacity and inductance required at the top of a vertical antenna as a function of ground resistance, for a frequency of 1875 kc. These values are sufficiently close for the entire band, when the adjustment procedure described ib the text is followed.

1214p.jpg

Fig. 1214 - Capacitence of sphere, disc, and cylinder as a function of their diameters. The cylinder length is assumed equal to its diameter.

1215b.jpg

Fig. 1215 - Inductanc os coils of various diameters wound with No. 14 wire, 8 turns per inch.

1216vb.jpg

Fig. 1216 - A skeleton disc for top loading suitible for 160 meter operation. This disk, constructed with a 4-foot diameter outer rim of quarter-inch copper tubing and wire "spokes" has a capacity of approximately 40 μμfd. Connection should be made to its center.

Top-Loaded Antennas

Instead of bending or folding up the antenna length required for resonance, it is possible to use a simple vertical wire with concentrated capacity and/or inductance at its top to simulate the effect of its missing length. This system is more critical as to frequency - that is, it is not quite as tolerant with respect to working over a band of frequencies - but us structurally advantageous since only one pole is required.

The top-loading apparatus may consist simply of a capacity or, better, a capacity and inductance suitably proportioned. The capacity used is not the usual type of condenser, which would be ineffective since the connection is one-sided, but consists of a metallic structure which exhibits the necessary capacity to space. Practically any sufficiently-large metallic structure can be used for the purpose, but simple geometric forms such as the sphere, cylinder, and the disk are referred because of the relative east with which their capacity may be calculated. The inductance may be the usual type of r.f. coil, with suitable protection from the weather.

The ratio for inductance to capacity depends, for a given frequency, principally upon the ground resistance. Fig. 1213 is a set of curves giving the values for 1875 kc., which is representative of the 1715- to 2000-kc. band. These curves are based on obtaining 75 per cent of the maximum possible increase in field strength over an antenna of the same height without top loading. An inductance coil of reasonably low-loss construction is assumed. The general rule is to use as large a capacity as the circumstances will permit, since an increase in capacity will cause an improvement in the field strength. It is particularly important to do this when, as is usually the case, the ground resistance is not known and cannot be measured.

The capacity of the geometric forms shown by the curves of Fig. 1214 as a function of their size. For the cylinder, the length is specified equal to the diameter. The sphere, disc and cylinder can be constructed from sheet metal, if such construction is feasible, but the capacity will be practically the same in each case if a "skeleton" type of construction, using screening or wire networks, is used. The disc is probably the easiest to make, and has less wind resistance than either of the other two shapes. A disc of the openwork type is shown in Fig 1216.

The bottom of the antenna is fed through a parallel-tuned circuit with one side grounded, as in Fig. 1212. The adjustment procedure is as follows: Starting with all of L shorted out, adjust the tuning to give satisfactory transmitter input, using the method for parallel-tuned circuits described earlier in this booklet. Measure the field strength by means of a simple field strength meter (vacuum-tube voltmeter and antenna), or by using a receiver, equipped with an S-meter, some distance away. Comparative readings only are needed. Next, move the tap on L to include a few turns, readjust the coupling parallel circuit tuning to maintain the same transmitter input, and note the new field strength. Continue this process until all of L is in the circuit. Plot a curve or relative field strength in L; the curve should rise at first as the turns are increase until a critical point is reached where there is a sudden drop in field strength. Finally, set L a turn or two just below the maximum point.

There you have it. I hope it helps.


The DB
 
Couple of things.
If an antenna is physically shorter than a 1/4 wave length then it will radiate in a less efficient manner than a 1/4 wave length antenna. Meaning it's radiation pattern will be lesser/smaller than the 1/4 wave's. It doesn't matter how much that antenna is 'loaded', it's radiation patter (shape/size) will not be the equivalent of a 1/2 wave antenna. That radiation pattern is physical length dependent. That's not difficult to see at all, try it with one of the modeling programs.

:confused:

So doc, how did you get on radiation patterns from what was said? I certainly didn't bring it up and never assumed a shortened half wave would have a radiation pattern of anything other than an antenna with whatever that physical length happened to be. The thought I had has nothing to do with attempting to change the radiation pattern of a shortened antenna. I myself have said on this and other forums on multiple occasion just what you said here. You apparently completely missed where I was going with what was said.

Are you reading what others have said in the past into what I am saying? Wow, that is risky. I say what I mean and mean what I say, or go out of my way to try to at least. If I don't bring up something like, say, radiation patterns of a shortened antenna as an example, then what I am referring to has nothing to do with radiation patterns of a shortened antenna, at least not in my mind.


The DB
 
homer , have you considered swapping the merlin and dipole mounting locations ? i honestly wouldn't expect much difference . but in the interest of being fair ....... and just to eliminate the possibility of the dipole location benefiting a antenna there , and/or the merlin being in a location that possibly impaired it .... or a little of both .
Yes, I have. It's in the plan.

I will move the Merlin to the tip over mast and the others to the push up pole.
 
:confused:

So doc, how did you get on radiation patterns from what was said? I certainly didn't bring it up and never assumed a shortened half wave would have a radiation pattern of anything other than an antenna with whatever that physical length happened to be. The thought I had has nothing to do with attempting to change the radiation pattern of a shortened antenna. I myself have said on this and other forums on multiple occasion just what you said here. You apparently completely missed where I was going with what was said.

Are you reading what others have said in the past into what I am saying? Wow, that is risky. I say what I mean and mean what I say, or go out of my way to try to at least. If I don't bring up something like, say, radiation patterns of a shortened antenna as an example, then what I am referring to has nothing to do with radiation patterns of a shortened antenna, at least not in my mind.


The DB
I could be wrong, but when I read what Doc posted about the radiation patterns I thought he was simply pointing out why the dipole was showing some favor over the 1/4 wave Merlin, particularly seeing it has a more greatly reduced height than normal. I thought he was trying to add a little in order to keep us grounded in what may be in play here.

shrug.gif
 
since the merlin is about 6 ft tall , could it be considered a 1/6 wave ground-plane antenna ?
 
Can you post the current report?

Elevated current distribution aside, it still looks like a ¼λ antenna to me. That diagram you posted still shows the current node at the base of the antenna.


What I was theorizing from the diagram I quoted above would not be possible with a ¼λ antenna (even shortened) as, unless I'm missing something, the current node would always be at the base. With the ability to adjust tuning on both sides of a shortened ½λ, you should be able to center the current node or raise it towards the top of an antenna, at least in theory. I'm also still wondering if such a design would decrease the efficiency to the point that any gains you would see would be lost.


I personally don't need such a capability, but, if you are limited by a height restriction, would it not help to be able to move the current node itself higher on the antenna? Isn't that part of the design goals for the Astroplane and Merlin antennas with their higher feed points (one of which this thread was created to share the op's experiences with said design?) Or how about a mobile setup, same overall shortened lengths, but with a higher current node in the antenna raising the most effective radiating part of it several feet above the vehicle itself?


Or perhaps I'm just daydreaming here, after all, it is just theory at the moment...



The DB


DB, this is a 1/4 wave, but I have heard some silly talk that the Immortal is a 1/2 wave...if that is what you were questioning. You're not missing anything, the current node (maximum) is always at the base of a 1/4 wavelength element, even when turned upside down. <gotproof>


Re: the rest of you comments, when I talk about raising the current distribution, I'm not talking about elevating the antenna or the pattern. I guess this is more about the location of a load issue, and a distinction that is being missed. However, I think I get your point.


Here are two current reports to compare. I trimmed the segment count down for the radials so the reports are shorter. This will change the values noted just a little bit, but it is a very small difference.


One is for the Immortal at about 47", and a model of the Merlin that has a full 1/4 wave radiator that is about 102" long. I added some lines and notes to indicate where the radiators start and where they stop...so you don't have to figure that out.


The % noted is the point on each radiator where we see about .56amps and this indicates the current distribution has been raised on the shorter radiator as a percentage of the whole radiator. In this case it is 99%+ vs. 64%.


IMO, this is what raising the current distribution is all about, we are not talking about elevating the pattern here.


View attachment Current Reports for the Immortal_ Merlin.pdf
 
I think you guys are pulling my leg.

Where do you get the pixie dust ya'll are using to sprinkle on your antennas as you broadcast, so you can see all these lobes, waves, and radiation signals?

Are ya'll telling me if two antenna are equal in resonance, that the actual wave from a short antenna is physically shorter than the wave from a longer antenna? :confused:
 
I could be wrong, but when I read what Doc posted about the radiation patterns I thought he was simply pointing out why the dipole was showing some favor over the 1/4 wave Merlin, particularly seeing it has a more greatly reduced height than normal. I thought he was trying to add a little in order to keep us grounded in what may be in play here.

shrug.gif

If this is the case I apologize doc. I was the only person here that suggested such a large shortening of a ½λ antenna, and I assumed, rightly or wrongly, that he was referring to my posts.


The DB
 
I think you guys are pulling my leg.

Where do you get the pixie dust ya'll are using to sprinkle on your antennas as you broadcast, so you can see all these lobes, waves, and radiation signals?

Are ya'll telling me if two antenna are equal in resonance, that the actual wave from a short antenna is physically shorter than the wave from a longer antenna? :confused:

Uh oh, do I see an electrical length vs physical length radiation pattern debate starting up?

Should such a thing happen might I suggest a new thread? It would make it easier to find for reference later...


The DB
 
Uh oh, do I see an electrical length vs physical length radiation pattern debate starting up?

Should such a thing happen might I suggest a new thread? It would make it easier to find for reference later...


The DB

I didn't start it DB, but I could have misread something.

Just to be clear, has it been said that Homer's dipole, being physically longer than his Merlin, makes a physically longer or bigger wave when broadcast?
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.