• 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.

Modified Vector 4000

does anyone have the tubing schedule and antenna dimensions for the vector 4000? I would like to build one using larger tubing and materials. If someone could email me the file that would be great.

Here are the dimensions and diameters from Bob85 & Multimode200 for the New Vector 4000. The hoop has a dimeter of about 30". Good luck.

Vector New 4000 (336x640).jpg
 
4000

thanks marconi for the reply. Now if I can get some free time I will see what I can put together. I know some have used a modified gamma from maco so I guess I will do the same. It will be alot easier that way I supose.
 
i wouldn't use copper pipe for a free standing vertical more than 10 feet long . its very heavy and i expect the soldered joints to fail in modest wind ....... if they even survive raising the antenna . also , RF wise , there is absolutely no humanly detectable tx or rx difference between copper or aluminum .
 
ok, guess I will have to make the trip to pick up some aluminum and fire up the tig welder.

I don't know about needing the welder, but aluminum tubing is a much better idea for antenna construction due to its superior strength to weight ratio.
 
OK, I think I will. I'll initially pattern it after the New Vector and see if it provides better performance up to Rich @ ~80 miles compared to my Penetrator 500.

Anyone know the New Vector radial Ring diameter / circumference?
just curious if got to test yet?and what is the ideal height to get these
up to. cause be hard to put up a 40ft. tower with a 20 plus foot antenna on the top
of it..lol
 
Copper has a lower resistance than aluminum, so the lengths will have to be adjusted EVER so slightly. Probably not that you would even notice.

As others have said, copper is SOFTER, so it will bend and flex.

What nobody else pointed out is this: Due to skin effect, the conductivity of the OXIDES matter. Aluminum oxide conducts RF better than copper oxides (the green shit that comes on copper exposed to elements).... SO, over time, aluminum antennas WILL outperform the more expensive, heavy and unwieldy copper ones.

Copper = bling, though :))))


--Toll_Free
 
Copper has a lower resistance than aluminum, so the lengths will have to be adjusted EVER so slightly. Probably not that you would even notice.

As others have said, copper is SOFTER, so it will bend and flex.

What nobody else pointed out is this: Due to skin effect, the conductivity of the OXIDES matter. Aluminum oxide conducts RF better than copper oxides (the green shit that comes on copper exposed to elements).... SO, over time, aluminum antennas WILL outperform the more expensive, heavy and unwieldy copper ones.

Copper = bling, though :))))


--Toll_Free

Maybe that's what the claim of an antenna getting burned in comes from due to the oxidation and expelling of oils placed on the metal.

Copper=crack heads stealing it.:LOL:
 
I don't want to say Roy is wrong however, I think Cebik was more on the ball in suggesting NEC is not going to be easy to work with the Sigma design. As has already been discussed the Sigma will tune with a perfect VSWR over a wide range of radiator lengths because of the gamma match used. NEC will not let you manipulate the radiator length and compensate with a gamma match. This is a critical tool for peaking gain in the design. This is one reason everyone's model is shorter then the real antennas. Until I see a way to simulate the capacitor of the gamma match on the Sigma I see NEC as a hopeless waste of time in this case. Make the radiator anything between 3/4 and 7/8 wave and the VSWR goes up while the gain goes down. This antenna gets added gain when going slightly beyond 3/4 wave and the program seems to prevent us from even reaching 3/4 wave. Without being able to stretch the radiator length and cancel out the inductive reactance with a capacitor there is no accurate modeling of this antenna in NEC.

No antenna when modeled with Eznec needs a matching device to show the results of gain etc. A matching network as far as I am aware doesnt effect radiation patterns of antennas, if you think it does then maybe Jay's hairpin does more than what you think it does, if you say his hairpin does nothing but provide a match then we are in agreement that a matching network is not needed for an accurate model, knowing how the program works is more important for modeling accuracy.
 
Eddie are these the Modified Version numbers that is supposed to work better? or just stock numbers?

They are the numbers they measured Multimode's New Vector 4000 from. The model I sent you is the Antenna Specalists version of their Sigma4 with three legs.
 

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