[Antennas] Inductively loaded Dipole vs. Zig-Zag Dipole

[Jim Miller]

I'm of the impression that the radiation comes mainly from the "current"
section of the antenna; the feedpoint in the case of a dipole.  That being
the case, I would go with the zig-zag option AND keep as much of the wire as
you can closest to the feedpoint as straight.  Do whatever zig-zag you need
toward the ends or just leg the ends hang.  I would also keep the zigs and
zags as shallow as possible instead of sharp bends.  The length will be
somewhat affected by the zig-zags.  I would also expect a wider usable
bandwidth with the full length wire than with loading coils.

73, Jim

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <k0occ at comcast.net>
To: <antennas at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 1:52 PM
Subject: [Antennas] Inductively loaded Dipole vs. Zig-Zag Dipole


I have about 140 feet between two trees to put up a 160 meter antenna. Would
really appreciate the benefit of  experiences and opinions as to what might
be better option for general purpose 160 antenna.

A) Inductively loaded short dipole 140 feet long, 40 feet high (loading
coils in middle of legs). (feed with 450 ohm ladder line.)

B) Zig-Zag dipole 240 feet long, 140 feet in street line 40 feet high, and
ends bent sideways and down. (feed with 450 ohm ladder line)

In net, am I better off using loading coils on shorter antenna, or bending
the longer antenna to fit space?

TNX & 73

--
Ernie, k0occ
Atlanta, GA
______________________________________________________________
Antennas mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
Post: mailto:Antennas at mailman.qth.net