[Elecraft] EFHW vs Off-Center Fed Dipole

[David Gilbert]

Take a look at this link by AA6TB where he describes a counterpoise for 
an EFHW.

http://www.aa5tb.com/efha.html      (see Figure 5)

At least in his version, which I believe is the "standard" configuration 
for one, the additional 0.05 wavelength wire is indeed added to the 
length of the antenna.  All it has done is move the secondary of the 
transformer away from the end of the wire to get a lower impedance ... 
just as I described below.  I don't understand why this is so difficult 
to grasp.

Unless the counterpoise you are talking about is connected somewhere 
else in the system?  Primary side of the transformer?  Somewhere else?  
If so I'd like to see a link to a drawing of it and I'd like to have 
somebody explain how it supposedly works because it makes no sense to me 
to put it there.

Otherwise, you are indeed adding length to the antenna on the far side 
of the matching network ... just exactly as if it was an off-center fed 
dipole.

Dave   AB7E



On 1/13/2018 4:55 PM, Bill Johnson wrote:
> The 3.5 ft aren't added.  On the transformer, the low gnd side is where the .05' wire is added.  It takes care of static and stray capacitance.  I cannot remember the fellow who has written volumes about EFHW's and there is clearly a need for this.  Absent a ground this works extremely well for portable end feds.  The research was done in the field not on a model.  There appears to be some misunderstanding, Dave. EFHW's use a wound transformer to match/reduce the impedance seen on the end of the wire.  I had written about this in a previous post with very poor sentence structure, using "smart phone".
>
> 73,
> Bill
> K9YEQ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:22 PM
> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] EFHW vs Off-Center Fed Dipole
>
>
>
> You can use whatever terms you want, but physically and electrically you are turning the EFHW into an off-center fed dipole when you add the "counterpoise" wire beyond the feedpoint.  If you don't agree with that you are merely adding to the confusion.
>
> If you add 3.5 feet to a half wave 40 meter dipole it already is no longer a true half wave anyway, and you might as well just feed the half wave antenna 3.5 feet from one end.
>
> Don't believe me?  I modeled a half wave 40m dipole at 70 feet in
> EZNEC+.  At 67 feet long and fed at the center the feedpoint impedance
> was 66 - j4 ohms.  When I simply moved the feedpoint out to 3.5 feet from one end (keeping the total length at 67 feet) the feedpoint impedance became 1509 - j1202.  I then added 3.5 feet to the antenna (total of 70.5 feet) and fed it 3.5 feet from one end, which in your world would be the EFHW with a 3.5 foot "counterpoise."  The feedpoint impedance changed to 3317 - j3115 ohms.  Which do you think would be easier to match (or easier to understand)?   The 3D radiation pattern was indistinguishable from each other in all three cases, of course.
>
> It doesn't matter what you call it, but if you take a piece of wire and feed it some distance from the end you now have an off-center fed dipole ... an extreme version possibly, but an off-center fed dipole nonetheless.
>
> In my opinion, the term "counterpoise" is mostly a silly obfuscation.
>
> Dave   AB7E
>
>
>
> On 1/13/2018 6:44 AM, Don Wilhelm wrote:
>> Dave,
>>
>> All information I have seen says that the counterpoise needed for an
>> EFHW is 0.05 wavelength - at 40 meters, that is about 3.5 feet.
>>
>> If you make it longer than that, it becomes an offset center fed
>> antenna, longer than a halfwave, in other words, it is a random length
>> wire.  Both the half wavelength wire and the counterpoise wire will
>> radiate.
>>
>> 73,
>> Don W3FPR
>>
>> On 1/12/2018 7:43 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>>> Well, since you brought up EFHW there is a relevant comment I've
>>> wanted to make for a while.
>>>
>>> An EFHW with a counterpoise wire (which everyone seems to claim is
>>> important to have) is basically just an extreme version of an
>>> off-center fed dipole.  A half wave dipole has its lowest impedance
>>> at the center, where the current is high and the voltage is low.  As
>>> you move out away from the center the current decreases and the
>>> voltage increases, which is equivalent to saying that the impedance
>>> increases.  As you get to the end of the wire the current obviously
>>> goes to near zero except for capacitive currents while the voltage
>>> goes very high ... meaning high impedance.  The "counterpoise" for an
>>> EFHW is merely an extension that puts the feedpoint back toward the
>>> center where the impedance isn't quite as high.  And as with any
>>> dipole, it isn't critical how that "counterpoise" is physically
>>> arrayed because the current there is small so it doesn't affect the
>>> pattern much ... just as is the case with a dipole with drooping ends.
>>>
>>> I think if everyone viewed EFHW antennas as off-center-fed dipoles
>>> there would be a lot less confusion about how they work.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to k9yeq at live.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to xdavid at cis-broadband.com