Dipole Antenna Showdown: Comparing Flat-Top and Inverted-V Designs 

Great content. Maybe as possible antenna to test on software or in real life use, is an antenna originally sold by PAL Electronics in the 1960's and later by Wilson Antennas. It is right triangle loop. Its perimeter is the same as other one wave length loop antennas. It is set up in the vertical plane. The right angle is at the bottom, along with one side horizontal across the bottom. The other side to right angle is vertical with the hypotenuse at 45 degrees. PAL sold this antennas as bein vertically polarized. Wilson sold it was being both vertically and horizontally polarized when fed at the right angle. I think both were wrong and the polarization is more along 45 degrees. It worked great for DX, with signals bouncing around at all angles, but locally it seemed poor for vertical and horizontal stations. Wilson, unlike PAL, included instructions to make the antenna just horizontally polarized, by rotating it 45 degrees, with the hypotenuse horizontal and the right angle feed point at the bottom center. Users claim this orientation has better signal to noise ratio and better gain. The original had the two right angle arms of aluminum tubing and the hypotenuse of wire, but the whole thing can be constructed of wire. For the corners, I use 6 inches of antenna wire wrapped around either side of the corner insulators and solder the twists. This fixes the pull points properly. To determine the side lengths I use a right triangle calculator that only requires inputting the perimeter and one 45 degree angle. This tells me the sides I can measure from the right angle feed point and the hypotenuse is what is left of the wire. calculator here. www.calculator.net/right-triangle-calculator.html

First three words of your comment.. I am same!

Hey thanks!

Glad to hear it!

Nice

Interesting. PSK Reporter is a fun tool. Of course propagation can change over a couple hours depending on day/sun etc.

PDL2.. Nice :)

Peter, your 3.5W was pretty good!! And OK on the back-scatter. Not a lot of people are aware of that.

Thanks for watching!

Craig. Yes, I think inspiration comes first! Thanks.

Yes, correct.. Inside goes one-way.. the outside goes the other way.

So many variables.. Depends on which frequency but at 20 feet, in the main it will be mostly omni-directional I think.

1/2 wave dipoles at 1/4 wave height don't work very well, you really need to be closer to its halfwave length above ground. Critical for 80 and 160m

John, I wouldn't worry about the coax (for our simple experiments)..

I see.. It doesn't matter. It would hardly skew the pattern at all..

Yes they are!

@@DXCommanderHQ another good thing is even if you use top quality stuff you can still build a 40m EFHW for $125 USD using real antenna wire, insulators, UnUn and cable ties..

90 degrees to each other... That's an inverted V..?

I run a 40m 1/2 wave and an 80 1/2 wave, both almost flatop both 50ft high. Stick to the 468/F rule and you'll get resonance every time for the freq you cut it at.

Eddie, you will have to explain that again slightly more detail because in my head that's what I have, I'm so sorry. PS - I probably won't see your comment (the system doesn't let me follow threads). So maybe make a new comment and I'll see that.

Not really.. The polarisation changes as soon as you hit the ionosphere and is then completely unpredictable.

AH OK.. Swings and Roundabouts :)

At that height, you will only have a 3dB difference between off the edges and off the sides.

@@DXCommanderHQ Thank you for that information.

Depends on the environment. Some folks have noticed LESS. Remember, it's not the antenna that's noisy - but the crud that's making the noise :)

Don, I think IN THE MAIN unless we go about half a wavelength above ground, we will be "bubbling"..!

Yes you can.. Patterns are weird things you will you will be stonger over "there" and less so over "there" (wherever "there" is : )

Good idea

Sounds like utter myth and baloney from folks who read too many books and no experience :)

@@DXCommanderHQ thanks!

Well, if you can get me a free license, I will try - but it's very expensive software.

it is student version where you can download free in google sir@@DXCommanderHQ

Here is a dipole using that software. .. You just need to change dimensions.. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ifhj6kDVbWs.html

Wiggles Wrangler!! LOL

It's called MMANA.. I have made some videos specifically about that.

You mean a V.. Haha.. Problem then is that the high current is very low down.

I don't know wat that means. I was curious about directionality and take off angle. Thanks, AC4OW

I have one that covers 10 to 80, and works well enough actually. Just make sure you get one, or build one with a proper 4:1 balun and a separate good quality choke.

OCF dipoles are an interesting subject. Not made a video about that but once you get it, possibly easier to multi-band (well.. SOME bands!)

1. Erm.. not really. Ignore it. As you would a boom of a yagi. 2. The RF has to "get out" somewhere. YOu can't really make an more or destroy the energy so if designed well, it shouldn't matter UNLESS it's full of traps. Say DX Commander Vertical has exactly same efficiency on all the bands when compared to mono.

Well, TBH I'm not an end-fed man. It's a sort of "free lunch" and does everything and nothing (for me!). I think if you have the time and engineering, dipole would be "better".

It would be interesting for you to lose the "double" one day because I'll bet you probably won't notice UNLESS you have terrific height.

@@DXCommanderHQ sorry for the typo - "doublet"

Time. I enjoy videos. I am half-way through a completely different book to ham radio.. One day..!

HAHAHA!

Not really.. About is good enough