Quad 4EL Vertical

[TheBlaster]

So what do you suggest is the angle of radiation of a horizontal dipole at different heights?

Yes it does differ antenna to antenna. We must compare apples to apples. We have to start with a reference point. A horizontal dipole and its ground gain seems like a very good starting point to me. I found a study of it and 29 degrees / 8dBi gain was mentioned. I will post it up when I find the source again.

Whether this antenna in question..... the quad... is vertical or not it remains the same antenna at feed point X seemingly 11m.

I found this which seems to be the original published study

http://on5au.be/content/a10/ant58.html

Though I had found it "reprinted" elsewhere.

" Horizontal ½-Wavelength Dipole ½-Wavelength above Ground Level
Ground Quality Salt Water Very Good Average Very Poor
Gain dBi 8.36 7.73 7.24 6.48
Elevation Angle 29° 28° 28° 27°"

Anyway I am leaving this thread now. Crack on with it, make your decisions and enjoy your radio whatever dx you end up with, it won't be a difficult job with 4 elements on a 1,000 feet hill with any polarization.

It seems short and often wrong blanket statements acheive the greatest respect on this forum. And without the slightest bit of humility, apology or thanks given to counter arguments with source information. Enjoy the continued, unpolite statements that are often wrong.

 

[AudioShockwav]

Anyway I am leaving.....

It seems short and often wrong blanket statements acheive the greatest respect on this forum. And without the slightest bit of humility, apology or thanks given to counter arguments with source information. Enjoy the continued, unpolite statements that are often wrong.

It seems you get in a twist when you disagree with someone.
So you just post and " drop the mic" .
Maybe you need a vacation from the forum?




Jeff

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Sounds like perhaps the Blaster just got blasted. In any event I shall respond and NOT run away just because someone disagrees with me. You used a half wave dipole as an example with relatively high angle radiation compared to the antenna in question. You also used salt water which tends to "pull" the signal down closer to the ground and neither of these two things has ANYTHING to do with the antenna being a four element quad over real earth and yet you say we must compare apples to apples. Not sure just what kind of apples you have in the UK but it sure doesn't sound like an equal comparison to me at all. You also said that it seems blanket statements get the most respect here and then go and make a blanket statement that ground gain is 29 degrees and later agree with me that it varies from antenna to antenna. It must be something about the wet weather over there but almost every time we have a member from the UK it seems like they have a certain "how dare you question me" type of attitude. Apologies to those few that do not.

Oh and one more thing, from the very link YOU posted, lets read the end together shall we?


" The next time you operate from a vacation island or boat, do not discount the simple vertical antenna as a highly effective way to make a lot of contacts (propagation permitting). However, over dry land, a horizontal dipole even as low as ½ wavelength above ground may give you the stronger signal."

That right there is exactly what we have been saying all along about V versus H and the reason is ground gain. A simple HORIZONTAL antenna will outperform a vertical on DX. Cebic said it himself in the very article YOU quoted in an effort to show me wrong. Thank you for showing I was right.

 

[Dr_DX]

https://vu2nsb.com/radio-propagation/ground-wave-propagation/

If the OP is stating that he can get 250KM on his GP, then he is using Surface Wave Propagation to do it. He has other stations that are 300KM away and he is trying to reach them. LOS @ 391m is only about 80km. According to this article:

Let us summarize the surface wave propagation properties as…

• Reliable terrestrial propagation at MF and HF over several hundred kilometers.
• The propagation range reduces with an increase in frequency.
• Vertical polarization ensures longer range compared to Horizontal polarization.
• Moist terrain and water bodies result in longer range compared to dry soil.
• Stable signal strengths at the RX site, not affected by geophysical conditions.
• The inverse-square law of free space propagation principles does not apply.

This isn't DX. So a 4EL Quad vertically polarized should get him a longer surface wave propagation compared to his GP.

 

[Darek]

Thanks for the answers
My question was a bit different. The fact that by placing the quad antenna I will gain in vertical polarization is rather obvious. My questions do I lose a lot on DX. At a height of about 1 m above the ground, the dx antenna works better in horizontal polarization Dx. Also placed vertically one meter above the ground and set on the correspondent, it is comparable to the Mantova Turbo antenna 11 m higher. Leaving the quad antenna in horizontal polarization what can I do to improve the results. Maybe 3/4 or 7/8 antenna. Thanks

 

[Dr_DX]

Thanks for the answers
My question was a bit different. The fact that by placing the quad antenna I will gain in vertical polarization is rather obvious. My questions do I lose a lot on DX. At a height of about 1 m above the ground, the dx antenna works better in horizontal polarization Dx. Also placed vertically one meter above the ground and set on the correspondent, it is comparable to the Mantova Turbo antenna 11 m higher. Leaving the quad antenna in horizontal polarization what can I do to improve the results. Maybe 3/4 or 7/8 antenna. Thanks

Other than raising the quad higher than 1 meter off the ground, it won't improve the results if horizontal (shorter Surface wave that what you currently have).

If you raise it to 11m and use Vertical polarization, you have a better chance talking to your friends 300 KM away (via Surface wave), and you will have better DX compared to the DX you currently have on your Vertical GP (same polarization, more Db gain).

DX is rarely exactly vertical or horizontal; it is usually somewhere in between. Having a loop will help with that.

 

[BJ radionut]

Darek:
The quad at present height will be hard to judge how it will perform.
The quad from my personal experience, and what I have gathered from those with greater knowledge that I will tell you the Quad will begin to work effectively at about 1/2 wavelength above ground. (11m Quad roughly 4-5 meters above ground to bottom of element)
The antenna will then begin to show the true isolation of how the antenna is
polarized.
The antenna below that height will be patterned distorted, thus having characteristics of both Horizontal and Vertical. The antenna could also be pattern distorted, as to where the antenna is directed.
I would always IMHO run the antenna horizontal. This is why, manmade noise is most generally vertical. The vertical noise generated will raise the ambient noise threshold in the receiver, thus requiring more signal incoming to overcome the noise. This ambient noise could be as high as 20db greater in the vertical polarization vs. horizontal.
The antenna in the horizontal configuration will appear to "hear" better.
We then get to, "if you can't hear them; you can't work them".
Darek, just my 2 cents worth.
The statements of the polarization "bending" has merit, when reflected off the atmospheric layers, however over time you will find horizontal reception will almost always be better than vertical.
This will be the case most generally in distance greater than 500km (300+ miles).
My experience this holds true in distance up to 300-2000+ miles in range.
I have only one antenna for 10 meters in the vertical configuration, only for distance to other vertical stations with-in the 60 miles +/- range (100km).
Then any distance greater than that I run horizontal.
There is merit also that vertical signal transmission will produce greater signal at the receive end at great distances (greater than 2000+ miles), however it should be noted that many of those stations transmitting in vertical will most generally listen(receive) in horizontal.
This is due to the noise threshold difference stated earlier.
Darek, either way have fun enjoy.
Best for the Holiday season
All the Best
Gary/W9FNB

Cubical Quad Antenna (wa2ooo.com)

ttps://www.lral.lv/4_element_quad.htm