Antenna Readings

[Gunner357]

Obviously I know this one SWR 1:1
(Z) 56.3 ohms
(R) 56.3 ohms
(X) 2.1 ohms
(RL) 24 DB
PHASE 18.0 q
(L) 13.4 nH
(C) -2.5 nF
Anyone know these figures?

[MDYoungblood]

Hmm, I'm no expert but will give it a shot, yes they are good but could be better. Some of the calculations are geared toward engineers.
(Z) is impedance, getting it as close to 50+/- would be perfect
(R) is resistance, basically should be the same reading as (Z) but shown as ohms, get it close to 50+/-
(X) is reactance, getting this number close to 0 means the antenna is at resonant length.
(RL) is return loss, basically what it means, the amount of signal lost in the system, getting the R/X down will drop this reading slightly.
These are the important readings, the rest is like I said before, more for an engineer, if you want to understand these I suggest Google (I like Yahoo search better).
The numbers you show are good but my math says it should read a 1.16:1 SWR which is great if it is on the frequency you want.

3's

Greg

[Gunner357]

Thank You.....here is a pic

[Gunner357]

Well Antenna is up so is the SWR so I'm just getting a MFJ949 tuner it will be here next week One good thing though the (X) value went down to 0.73 ohms from 2.1 ohms that's a plus . I can still talk but ch 40 went from 1:3 to 1:6 and the other 2 are at 1:2ish.....had a bad pl259 double female connectors so I'm ordering 2 Amphenol RF 83-1J-2 Double UHF Female Connectors bot they aren't cheap

[arcone]

If you are concerned with resonance, remember the length of coax will alter those complex impedance measurements.

[Gunner357]

If you are concerned with resonance, remember the length of coax will alter those complex impedance measurements.

I was told to Worry about the (X) 0.73 value which is lower since I put the Extra 20ft on but SWR is Higher it may be do to the double female pl259 One wasnt even making a connection the other barely Thats why Im ordering good ones

[arcone]

Yeah connectors can sometimes do odd things. Is this the same antenna? I thought I suggested the several things that would affect the swr with that set up. Did you add a balun or choke in the end?

[Gunner357]

Yeah connectors can sometimes do odd things. Is this the same antenna? I thought I suggested the several things that would affect the swr with that set up. Did you add a balun or choke in the end?

I added a balun/choke on the home made one And no change I gave up for now and bought a v58 Maco

[arcone]

Yeah connectors can sometimes do odd things. Is this the same antenna? I thought I suggested the several things that would affect the swr with that set up. Did you add a balun or choke in the end?

I added a balun/choke on the home made one And no change I gave up for now and bought a v58 Maco

Oh yeah I remember now, sorry about that. I suppose you would expect to see a flatter swr curve with that antenna?? I like to see it a bit under 1.5:1, it's psychological if anything.
If it makes you feel better, I got on one of those coaxial loss calculators and crunched some numbers... well it crunched them. Anyone feel free to correct me on this, I may be barking up the wrong tree. Okay, this is an example:
Say you've got a 100ft run of Belden RG213/U, and you swr is 1:1. If you put 100W in, you will see 78.5W at the other end.
If your swr is 1.6, you will now see 76.9W. That's an increased loss of just 1.6W. And keep in mind that you need to double your power for half an S point. Not sure what your intentions are with the tuner, but I would imagine the losses associated with that would be greater than 1.6W.
Anyway, it's none of my business.

[Gunner357]

Yeah connectors can sometimes do odd things. Is this the same antenna? I thought I suggested the several things that would affect the swr with that set up. Did you add a balun or choke in the end?

I added a balun/choke on the home made one And no change I gave up for now and bought a v58 Maco

Oh yeah I remember now, sorry about that. I suppose you would expect to see a flatter swr curve with that antenna?? I like to see it a bit under 1.5:1, it's psychological if anything.
If it makes you feel better, I got on one of those coaxial loss calculators and crunched some numbers... well it crunched them. Anyone feel free to correct me on this, I may be barking up the wrong tree. Okay, this is an example:
Say you've got a 100ft run of Belden RG213/U, and you swr is 1:1. If you put 100W in, you will see 78.5W at the other end.
If your swr is 1.6, you will now see 76.9W. That's an increased loss of just 1.6W. And keep in mind that you need to double your power for half an S point. Not sure what your intentions are with the tuner, but I would imagine the losses associated with that would be greater than 1.6W.
Anyway, it's none of my business.

Yeh I was watching a you tube video today on How that works and how the tuner will make up for that loss..... It was pretty interesting That is one of the reasons I got the tuner coming the other is that antenna to heavy for me to raise and lower to adjust I almost lost it today i could hang on to it and i had no help

[arcone]

Yeah connectors can sometimes do odd things. Is this the same antenna? I thought I suggested the several things that would affect the swr with that set up. Did you add a balun or choke in the end?

I added a balun/choke on the home made one And no change I gave up for now and bought a v58 Maco

Oh yeah I remember now, sorry about that. I suppose you would expect to see a flatter swr curve with that antenna?? I like to see it a bit under 1.5:1, it's psychological if anything.
If it makes you feel better, I got on one of those coaxial loss calculators and crunched some numbers... well it crunched them. Anyone feel free to correct me on this, I may be barking up the wrong tree. Okay, this is an example:
Say you've got a 100ft run of Belden RG213/U, and you swr is 1:1. If you put 100W in, you will see 78.5W at the other end.
If your swr is 1.6, you will now see 76.9W. That's an increased loss of just 1.6W. And keep in mind that you need to double your power for half an S point. Not sure what your intentions are with the tuner, but I would imagine the losses associated with that would be greater than 1.6W.
Anyway, it's none of my business.

These figures I gave in the example are wrong! The swr readings you see at the radio end are lower than the actual swr at the antenna because of the feedline losses.
A 1.6:1 in that example would actually translate to about 2:1! Losses still aren't too bad at 27mhz though, I think you'd see about 70W at the antenna, and about 77W with a 1.2:1 reading?? 1:1 swr, you'll have 78.5W. I'd have to crunch those numbers again to check.
Anyway what this says is that you are best to measure the swr as close to the feedpoint as possible, unless you are willing to make the calculations based on the known feedline losses of your run to the antenna. And use the best low loss coax you manage.
I will leave this and the original reply up for now in case I have mislead anyone else.
Jeremy.

[Gunner357]

Well antenna WAS tune with My RigExpert analyzer aa 230 Zoom at he antenna and they were good all this is when it was raised..... No biggy I order a antenna tuner it should solve my problem

[KOA4705]

Yeah connectors can sometimes do odd things. Is this the same antenna? I thought I suggested the several things that would affect the swr with that set up. Did you add a balun or choke in the end?

I added a balun/choke on the home made one And no change I gave up for now and bought a v58 Maco

Oh yeah I remember now, sorry about that. I suppose you would expect to see a flatter swr curve with that antenna?? I like to see it a bit under 1.5:1, it's psychological if anything.
If it makes you feel better, I got on one of those coaxial loss calculators and crunched some numbers... well it crunched them. Anyone feel free to correct me on this, I may be barking up the wrong tree. Okay, this is an example:
Say you've got a 100ft run of Belden RG213/U, and you swr is 1:1. If you put 100W in, you will see 78.5W at the other end.
If your swr is 1.6, you will now see 76.9W. That's an increased loss of just 1.6W. And keep in mind that you need to double your power for half an S point. Not sure what your intentions are with the tuner, but I would imagine the losses associated with that would be greater than 1.6W.
Anyway, it's none of my business.

These figures I gave in the example are wrong! The swr readings you see at the radio end are lower than the actual swr at the antenna because of the feedline losses.
A 1.6:1 in that example would actually translate to about 2:1! Losses still aren't too bad at 27mhz though, I think you'd see about 70W at the antenna, and about 77W with a 1.2:1 reading?? 1:1 swr, you'll have 78.5W. I'd have to crunch those numbers again to check.
Anyway what this says is that you are best to measure the swr as close to the feedpoint as possible, unless you are willing to make the calculations based on the known feedline losses of your run to the antenna. And use the best low loss coax you manage.
I will leave this and the original reply up for now in case I have mislead anyone else.
Jeremy.

Jeremy good point to measure the the swr vs frequency at the antenna feed point. In most cases this is not convenient to do. As suggested to extrapolate the feed point impedance (Z) and or swr from the shack end of the coax. To minimise line losses the antenna is match at the feed point. The coax losses will only be due to insertion loss only. By matching at the shack end will not change the swr on the coax. It will add additional losses in the transmission line due to swr. There will also be losses in the antenna tuner, majority due to resistance of inductor.

[arcone]

Yeah connectors can sometimes do odd things. Is this the same antenna? I thought I suggested the several things that would affect the swr with that set up. Did you add a balun or choke in the end?

I added a balun/choke on the home made one And no change I gave up for now and bought a v58 Maco

Oh yeah I remember now, sorry about that. I suppose you would expect to see a flatter swr curve with that antenna?? I like to see it a bit under 1.5:1, it's psychological if anything.
If it makes you feel better, I got on one of those coaxial loss calculators and crunched some numbers... well it crunched them. Anyone feel free to correct me on this, I may be barking up the wrong tree. Okay, this is an example:
Say you've got a 100ft run of Belden RG213/U, and you swr is 1:1. If you put 100W in, you will see 78.5W at the other end.
If your swr is 1.6, you will now see 76.9W. That's an increased loss of just 1.6W. And keep in mind that you need to double your power for half an S point. Not sure what your intentions are with the tuner, but I would imagine the losses associated with that would be greater than 1.6W.
Anyway, it's none of my business.

These figures I gave in the example are wrong! The swr readings you see at the radio end are lower than the actual swr at the antenna because of the feedline losses.
A 1.6:1 in that example would actually translate to about 2:1! Losses still aren't too bad at 27mhz though, I think you'd see about 70W at the antenna, and about 77W with a 1.2:1 reading?? 1:1 swr, you'll have 78.5W. I'd have to crunch those numbers again to check.
Anyway what this says is that you are best to measure the swr as close to the feedpoint as possible, unless you are willing to make the calculations based on the known feedline losses of your run to the antenna. And use the best low loss coax you manage.
I will leave this and the original reply up for now in case I have mislead anyone else.
Jeremy.

Jeremy good point to measure the the swr vs frequency at the antenna feed point. In most cases this is not convenient to do. As suggested to extrapolate the feed point impedance (Z) and or swr from the shack end of the coax. To minimise line losses the antenna is match at the feed point. The coax losses will only be due to insertion loss only. By matching at the shack end will not change the swr on the coax. It will add additional losses in the transmission line due to swr. There will also be losses in the antenna tuner, majority due to resistance of inductor.

Yes that sounds right, I would not use a tuner. I just didn't have the heart to break the news. As far as readings in the shack go, I think it's worth pointing out to people that the swr at the antenna could be much higher than they think, and combined with coaxial losses, effciency can be unnecessarily reduced. This is much worse at higher frequencies as you know.
I acknowledge that getting to the feedpoint is difficult, and calculations can be made if you know the losses in the feedline. On the next installation for a friend, we're going to trial using an analyser that has blutooth. It's going to be a tricky one too, a pair of stacked 6 element yagis. Measurements will be taken at the tee piece as well of coarse.

[Gunner357]

Just reminder I used a Analyzer (AA-230Zoom RigExpert) AT THE ANTENNA to come up with my SWR readings Highest 1.66:1 which is what I'm wanting lowered (X)=0.84 OHMS ...(Z) 37.3 OHMS ...(RL) 16.8 db.. Also I'm not a fan of tuners either BUT the new antenna is matched the best I can get it and I will be adding power, I also had a talk with a guy who is a family friend and Been a licensed HAM for a long time and a long time Maco User. These antennas are like this(per Maco) and the only way to correct is with a tuner. He had some of the influence on me making my decision on the tuner. If it doesn't do the job or any other issues pop up I can always sell it....

BTW the readings at the beginning of the TOPIC are when I first started. Reading are different after I messed with it a while later on

[MDYoungblood]

With a Maco antenna now that you have it up, I would use the analyzer to find where the antenna is most resonant and go from there in tuning it. Following the instruction dimensions, it should be in the 1.2 to 1.3 range giving it’s surroundings. Fine tuning can be done at the ring by moving the wire and clamp, adjustments should be done in 1/4 inch increments.
Antenna tuners are nice if you are using one antenna for a few bands like your amateur friend, my antenna will work well on 10,12,17, and 20m bands, 6 and 15m bands, not so much. Tuners are only made to fool the radio into thinking the antenna is resonant.

3’s

Greg

[Gunner357]

I know tuners are made to Fool and When/If I get my HAM license Ill be using multiple bands, as of right now my excuse is I cant lower the antenna adj raise it again and again alone. I tuned AT 10 feet and it tuned perfect raise it add coax it went up,,,, I'm doing this By my self I have no friends close that has the time to drive and help lift this thing I cannot reach the loop (p) clamp while its up....so for now the radio will have to be fooled....BTW I spoke to Maco they said to tune to your middle frequency IE: ch1 1:5 ch20 1:1 ch40 1:5....... I don't like that