In article <5c9fdf4e-19d4-4705...@googlegroups.com>,
<wa2b...@gmail.com> wrote:
The Moregain antenna was build by a company in maryland near D.C. An old h= >am gave me an original 80/40 meter one, along with operating instructions, = >and some operating notes from the original owner. The company literature c= >alled it a Monopole configuration, not a dipole. It worked great for me un= >til Florida heat and sun disolved the plastic spreaders. It was available = >for all ham bands at the time.That's a weird thing... not a folded dipole, not really trapped...
It looks like the patent on it is expired and you can build one without licensing now, but I don't really see this as being an improvement over
a fan dipole and it looks to be just as hard to tune. The description of operating principles in the patent is kind of screwy. It would be
interesting if someone would do a proper analysis of this design:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US3229298A
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
In article <5c9fdf4e-19d4-4705...@googlegroups.com>,
<wa2b...@gmail.com> wrote:
The Moregain antenna was build by a company in maryland near D.C. An old h= >am gave me an original 80/40 meter one, along with operating instructions, =That's a weird thing... not a folded dipole, not really trapped...
and some operating notes from the original owner. The company literature c= >alled it a Monopole configuration, not a dipole. It worked great for me un= >til Florida heat and sun disolved the plastic spreaders. It was available = >for all ham bands at the time.
It looks like the patent on it is expired and you can build one without licensing now, but I don't really see this as being an improvement over
a fan dipole and it looks to be just as hard to tune. The description of operating principles in the patent is kind of screwy. It would be interesting if someone would do a proper analysis of this design:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US3229298A
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
https://patents.google.com/patent/US3229298A=20
I hope this finds you in good health and fine holiday spirit.
I am an avid antenna builder, you can see some on QRX.
I was hoping you might have some documents on the monopole More Gain Antenn= >as.
The paten office documents do not help much. =20
I have reached out to Russell KH6JRM in Hawaii to see what he may be able t= >o help with documents. =20
I plan on building one and writing about this before it is lost in time.
Before I had mentioned:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US3229298A=20mechteacher <tsa...@netscape.net> wrote:
I hope this finds you in good health and fine holiday spirit.
I am an avid antenna builder, you can see some on QRX.
I was hoping you might have some documents on the monopole More Gain Antenn= >as.
The paten office documents do not help much. =20
I think the patent is... optimistic at best and probably does not reflect
the way the thing actually radiates. This is just a gut feeling; I don't
have any actual measurements to verify it. But it would strike me that it would not be too hard for someone to do a proper method of moments
analysis of the design.
I have reached out to Russell KH6JRM in Hawaii to see what he may be able t= >o help with documents. =20I think this design has probably been lost for a good reason, but a proper analysis will tell you for sure. Obviously it was not easy to do back in
I plan on building one and writing about this before it is lost in time.
the fifties, when scale models at high frequencies and waving fluorescent tubes around were really the only way to map out field strengths and radiation
patterns in the near field. Today a computer simulation should be pretty
easy to do.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 02:30:42 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,335,605 |