Test #2 Wolf River Coils Counterpoise Length Long VS. Short
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 июл 2024
- Test #2 Testing Longer but Fewer VS. More but Shorter counterpoise wires with the Wolf River Coils Antenna. Find out what happens in this exciting conclusion. Which one do you think will do better?? The results may surprise you!
Consider becoming a Patron @ / k8mrdradiostuff
Follow me on Twitter. / k8mrd
K8MRD Radio Stuff Shirts:
Happy Skull Guy: grapevineamateurradio.com/col...
Tower of Terror: grapevineamateurradio.com/col...
Affiliate Links to a bunch of stuff I use:
~~~5% off RigExpert Analyzers at Gigaparts~~~
**Use Code HRMR at checkout for discount to apply**
www.gigaparts.com/nsearch/?lp...
~~~5% off Comet Antennas at Gigaparts~~~
**Use code K8MRD**
www.gigaparts.com/nsearch/?lp...
~~~5% off PO4Power Batteries at Gigaparts~~~
**Use code HRM4 at checkout**
www.gigaparts.com/nsearch/?lp...
~~~5% off Messi & Paoloni Coax at Gigaparts~~~
**Use Code HRMM at checkout**
www.gigaparts.com/nsearch/?lp...
~~ 5% off Genasun products at Gigaparts
~~~~~Use Code MKGS at Checkout~~~~~
www.gigaparts.com/nsearch/?lp...
~~~$15 off most purchases over $65 at Radioddity:
radioddity.refr.cc/mikedahlhofer
~~Amazon Links~~
Icom IC-705: amzn.to/3nISk6S
Icom IC-7300: amzn.to/3rBdQeT
Yaesu FT-891:amzn.to/2XaTkof
Xiegu X5105: amzn.to/2U4jrtM
Xiegu G90: amzn.to/30fszPD
Bioenno BLF-1203W: amzn.to/3bXsRhP
Bioenno BLF-1203AB: amzn.to/39OAW74
Bioenno BLF-1206A: amzn.to/2XaWQ1L
Bioenno 20AH LiFePO4 Battery: amzn.to/2XfZPWT
Bioenno 12AH LiFePO4 Battery: amzn.to/2WHU9kp
Bioenno Charge Controller: www.bioennopower.com/collecti...
Hi-Tec Battery Charger: amzn.to/2YARsSt
Rich Solar 100 Watt Panel: amzn.to/3enp4vD
Carhartt Lunch Box: amzn.to/2xQfbGO
Shakespear 20' Wonderpole: amzn.to/2Rd9IiG
Powerwerx Power Pole Crimping Tool: amzn.to/3eDbpSo
Powerwerx Power Pole Distribution Block: amzn.to/2WHI3Ym
Powerwerx Volt Meter: amzn.to/2IG8AAw
Ailunce HD1: amzn.to/35HqBYZ
Baofeng UV-5R: amzn.to/2Ot3NX7
Tactical Backpack amzn.to/2k6jya7
Condor Rip EMT Pouch: amzn.to/2XjLUPG
iPad mini Bluetooth Keyboard: amzn.to/2IOtI7o
Red Rock Outdoors Sling Pack: amzn.to/2FdCKdf
Portable Operating for Amateur Radio Kindle: amzn.to/2X3I7EU
Portable Operating for Amateur Radio paperback: amzn.to/330xW7J
I may make a small commission on purchases made through the links above.
#hamradio #wolfrivercoils #parksontheair 
Наука
I don't know why, but I just had a really twisted thought. I was wondering if you make a "radial mat", maybe out of canvas or burlap, that was a 2 meter radius (sort of like the Christmas Tree skirts) and then prewire all your radials on the canvas so all you have to do is unroll it and your radials are in a perfect 360 arc, equally spaced and you just then need a single connection point in the center. Might make setup a lot faster. Also, depending on the color of the canvas, might make it less prone for people to walk/trip on. Dunno why I thought of that, or even why it might be better, but a hams mind just goes there sometime.
very nice idea... I'll look into this for the short radials...
I believe it would work. I over heard another ham talking over the air about an article, not by any ARRL publication but an engineering publication, that stated using a mesh wire pad is as effective as the 62 wires. It said it was also easier to install. I used chicken wire once and it seemed to work until the wire corroded after about 6-8 months. Very acidic soil I suppose.
I've been thinking along those lines but using old parachute and have it all elevated so it could also be a sunshade.
K8MRD, 'raw-dogging' it for science.
Counterpoise wires are tricky, and there's a difference between an elevated antenna a few feet off the ground (use elevated radials) and ground mounting it. In the second instance, you need to reduce ground losses as much as possible, so the more wire the better. But at a certain point the law of diminishing returns kicks in. You can tune the radials also. I have a 20m vertical a few feet off the ground that is 17' long, and one elevated radial of the exact same size and I get a 1:1 SWR and it gets out great. Those are just basic principles. But great video and one example of how these things can go.
Very interesting results Mike, and thanks for sharing.
You bet
Hi mike, Thanks for doing it, yes and the bands does stay the same all the time so must be diffrent but all very good,Pieter
Definitely worth knowing, since I have a WRC setup, and I'm temporarily living in an apartment and don't have a lot of room outside. Thanks for your effort, and the video.
I made a DIY WRC and used the 2m legs. my mount is 10" of aluminum angle with radials at each end. Now I have 5 radials per side and when lay'ed out its a circle pattern. I tested it on a MFJ-259 . I also made a cheat sheet out of a piece of cardboard to speed up the band changes. Using a G90 set at 18w made the first contact from Pensacola, FL. to Luma, CA. so far I'm very happy with the build even with really bad band conditions. Thanks for the tip es 73
Just for comparison, I got basically the same results on 20 meters to practically the same stations including the Hawaii, Alaska, and the one at/near the Canary Islands. I did get one station on the coast of Antarctica only once, and I felt really lucky to be heard that far away. I was using a 20 meter inverted V with the feed point at 34 feet and the ends about 10 feet above the ground with 10 watts. I have noticed that most of the stations on WSPR are probably receiving only because during several sweeps of receiving my station heard significantly less stations that those that heard me. I might consider purchasing a Wolf River Coils antenna because mine is one band only per antenna, and it gets burdensome when I have to swap antennas.
Sweet experiment results. I appreciate your efforts. When space permits, I've been using the WRC with a combination of short and long radials. Great to see that I can always go with the shorter radials in a pinch when space is more of a premium and still expect similar results. Thanks again PaPa POTA!!! :)
My pleasure. I love doing this kind of stuff. Thanks for watching.
I agree with don. The experiment was to show if you have the same amount of total length of wire on the ground more or less but using more shorter wires then the performance was about the same. I use 18 11ft radials so that’s 192 ft compared to 3 33ft radials 99ft so I’ve doubled mine and I use the 213 inch whip so it’s a full size quarter wave on 20 meters upwards. Also because of this you don’t need the coil. I’ve improved tx and rx by almost 2 s points. Point being if you at least double the amount of wire you will see a noticeable difference.
Absolutely. That 213" whip helps a bit too. I have a few of them. They work great.
I have used the multiple short radials and they're good and save space but I've also used radials coiled around a 12" length of PVC pipe to save even more space. With 20 watts and a 17' whip, I've reached Italy on 40 meters and that's when the SFI was still down in the 50's and 60's!
Thank You! I have a Wolf River Coil with the High Power coil, and the Center Load. I tested it and with the 3 wires that came with it, when I added some more wires to it, It helped the SWR some. I think I will run it with the wires that came with it and add more wires around 20 feet long. Have not really gotten it going yet checked it at winter field day. Weather getting better to get out. Hope to do some good tests with it soon. 73 W4DES
Thanks for doing this Mike. I get questions all the time on how I operate, and usually its, "Uhhhhh, I just used what Wolf River Coils sent me, uhhhhh works for me." I appreciate your using the tools to be as scientific as possible. You've clearly demonstrated you can adjust to your environment and still operate.
Oh WRC def has their stuff together. I've used their stock setup since day one until this experiment. Their antennas are fantastic. I was/am that guy "I just used what WRC sent me"!
seems interesting and fun
Great job Mike! But I contend you basically demonstrated that it makes no difference between the radial sets. As long as you have relatively the same amount of radial copper with capacitive coupling to the ground. A 37 QSO difference (less than 10% overall) is well within the 'margin of error' of ur experiment.
The variances in QSO # and location can easily attributed to propagation differences. Heck, I get wild QSB swings every 1-2 seconds while I'm out activating these days. Bottomline - great experiment and thanks for all the grunt work behind the scenes! I'll be sticking with my nine 10-foot radials (OK OK, nine 3.048-meter radials). And popping my beloved ice cold 16 oz Hazy IPA after a long hot day in the park (ya ya, I know, 0.473 liters). 73 buddy! KJ6ER, Silicon Valley
Woo Hoo! Is the WRC the antenna you use? You are in my log abt 12 times on the Cajun Coast. 73
@@bayoubees9447 wooooo hooooo!!! I use the Chameleon 17’ whip elevated on a 4’ spike and two tuned elevated radials per band, 20-6M. For 40M, I add the WRC Sporty Forty! 😊 73 KJ6ER
Hi Mike, Nice experiment. Wonder what you would get if you ran your experiment again with both sets of counter poise wires on at the same time? Testing out the more the better concept. I’ve found four 25 foot counter poise wires (they don’t have to be straight) seem to be the portable sweet spot for me, unless I can find a chain link fence to mount the antenna on. A chain link fence is very interesting, sort of like a large mesh field, but I digress. Nice content. 73 KM4SON
Mike , if it's multiple wires on the ground or buried it's a radial . If it's elevated and only one wire it's a counterpoise . Also if you use the same amount of wire but more shorter lengths you should achieve the same result as the longer radials . 73 DON VE3MNE
Thanks Mike. I made pig tails with 3/8” ring terminals with bullet connectors on the other end of the stock wrc ring terminals to make radials easier with the wrc instead of trying to manage dangling wire winders and such. MUCH easier. I made 6 additional 33’ radials and then I made pig tail shortened radials 3 meters long and 4 wires in a bullet connector for a total of 24. I too seem to have better performance slightly with the longer but it’s negligible. I do find when I use the longer additional radials in some areas I get lower SWR and better bandwidth but it’s really area dependent. I have found poor performance of the vertical in heavy Florida foliage. Tried to activate a park for two hours. Got two QSOs. Flung up the homemade 20m dipole it was like shooting fish in a barrel. Mind you very unscientific as the band may have changed. I went to a park last weekend with similar setting as to what you had there and the WRC performed flawlessly. Time for more testing….darn the luck. I have to go outside portable and play radio…well, ok. 😜
I'm erecting a 6-BTV at my home QTH using 32 radials of 16 feet in length, which is 524 feet of wire on the ground - or four wavelengths of wire at 40 meters. I think now I may reconsider and add four 32 feet radials to that total just to help out a bit with 40 meter DX. Thanks for another great video, Mike.
-K5SFC
Good test. Based on no scientific research at all, I've always believed that in using an antenna like a Wolf River Coil, that having half wave counterpoise wires to complete the second half of the antenna would be the most efficient. Based on your tests, for making contacts within the United States, there is little difference between the shorter and longer. The test shows that in many cases, that shorter radials when space is limited will be a viable way to set your antenna up. Looking for DX, use the 10 meter counterpoise wires and the more the better. Looking at the S/N would give further data.
Great test Mike. Coincidentally, I watched one of Callum's videos today where he did something similar with the DXCommander. In a nutshell, more shorter counterpoises = less longer ones, as long as the total number x length is the same or close.
That's pretty much the gist of it. Although I realize one fatal flaw in my design. I didn't measure by a fraction of a wavelength, but a division of the total radials supplied by WRC. I may need to re-do this. I've calculated 2.5 meters might be a better length for the radials. I still need to do some figuring though.
Good video but I think the difference between the two is a washout. Very low percentage difference then you consider the propagation changing second by second
Hey Mike, great video as always mate! I love this! I'm just working on a modified counterpoise length for 'reduced' real estate around me. Great test buddy! Thanks for sharing. Cheers and beers! Simon VA7BIX
Awesome, glad to help!
I have previously conducted my own totally non scientific tests with shorter radials. The first time I cut the supplied radials in half and added more to go with it, making around 12 5m radials and it worked really well. So, thumbs up for that.
Recently I tried some 3m radials made from the thinner Sotabeams wire and was a little disappointed as tuning for low SWR was a pain. The bands were rubbish too, so performance comparison was pointless. I wondered whether it was because the lightness of the wire, which made ground contact difficult on longish grass, was making the radials act more like de-tuned counterpoises than ground radials.
CQ publishes a book that discusses radials the title is "The Short Vertical Antenna and Ground Radial" It is well worth reading.
Kool.....I like this. I have a Wolf River TIA.....gives another option.
Awesome! Now start cutting more wire lol!
The thing about Whisper, FT8, is that they tell you nothing about operating conditions on SSB. Still nice work. Good video. Hope to work you on HF. 73 de N2LRB.
Good job, Mike. However: according the work of Cal the three radials of about 10 meters as your 15 radials of 2 meters are just not enough copper on the ground. If you want to stay with 2 meters you should try to get maybe 30 radials. That should make a difference. But if you like 15 radials you should make the wires 3,5 meters or so long.
Good Stuff Mike! - KE8QPI
Good test. I liked that you alternated your datasets/configurations to reduce systematic effects. WSPR is a good way to quantify results since it's not subjective - either you make a WSPR contact or not, no in-between. 73.
It's really just to prevent the people in the comments telling me that I did something wrong or how I should have done it :) Everyone is an expert at telling other people what they should do. But yes, had I done this on SSB or even digital like FT8 or something, there just wouldn't be as good a test result in my opinion.
@@hamradiotube Agreed. Keep up the good work, you’re making a positive difference in the hobby. 73.
Mike. I think another valid test, instead of changing radials, would be to compare the longer radials spread out fully to laying them out in a more concentrated pattern. I have stayed with the 3 - 33's, but sometimes lay them out in 3 circular patterns to use up less real estate. Thx for the vid. Brent
Like this? ruclips.net/video/v2USfvay3QU/видео.html
Hey Mike check out the eagle one antenna. Love mine
I could not get a good strong signal with the 3 X 33 foot radials. Went to 6 X 24 and the results were MUCH better.
Talked to a fellow the other day that used 6 and sometimes 9 radials at 16 and he was very happy with the results.
The real odd discover was to raise the antenna 3 or 4 feet when over rocky soil. Made a contact with a guy in Michigan that found the same thing.
Blast from the past...are you referring to the base being higher or extending/longer the whip higher?
So if I put 15 short wires and the long wires that comes with it, I should almost give me twice the contacts. HA HA I found that the SWR is higher when I use just the wires that came with it than when I added more short wires. I am going to make up 3 bunches of 6 wires to add to what came with it. I tested it with some wires that someone had I could use to test. I also took an 8 foot ground rod and cut in thirds, to use as spikes. After a heavy rain in my back yard will almost put me in the water table. After the last Hurricane there was water standing for days in my back yard, and my long wire was down. Muddy water may give me a good replacement for wires if I have trouble getting them out. Thank You for the information! 73 W4DES
Nice test Mr Mike.. Be interesting to see what the differences might be if you had a 'mid' coil with the spacing of about 4' or so above the spike. Also, do you think added radials (full size) might make any differences?
I have one of those. It's a center loaded version that raises the coil up 4'. That's a little beyond the scope of what I'm testing in this video though. I'm sure more full size radials would be good thing to a certain extent, but again, that is completely the opposite of what I'm trying to do in this video. I want a smaller footprint with the WRC. That was my goal.
So maybe try more long counterpoise wires out
Have you done a video on your ground spike? I’m looking to make/buy one.
No. It's pretty easy though. I made it out of a mirror mount and an old WRC Tripod leg that I ground to a point. But WRC sells them now too.
I’ve been planning on making radial sets of three wires each with three different lengths each. I’m thinking 10, 20, and 30 feet. Need to get off my butt and get done 😎
Thanks, Bro for doing this experiment. I've been concerned when deploying the radials that some dude may trip over them.
This actually happened to me once. An old lady was jogging through the park and didn't see one of them and tripped HARD. Luckily she was okay and was very nice about it, but I'm always very careful now.
Saw a video where the op put the tiny orange surveyor flags about so people would notice
I use 3x 33ft and 9x 8ft and have worked all over on FT8. I think not broken so no need to change.
Mike, just for grins try using just 3 of the short radials. Might surprise you
I think the tabular data would have spoken more about performance than just raw numbers and pattern. Ideally, you compile all of the contacts for each pass, and the snr for each contact and each call sign. For example, record snr for that Alberta station for all four of your testing cycles. I think that would tell more than anything else. it's still going to be subject to band fading, etc, but at least you'd be comparing apples to apples in each test.
Hi Mike,
Thanks for doing the tests. Results we as I expected, very little difference since the exact same total length of wire was used. Wonder if six half wavelengths (16 ft) or twelve 1/8 wavelengths (8 ft) might have given closer results? Maybe another day. Stay safe. 73 WJ3U
I can see I'm going to need more wire lol!
One more comparison I'd like to have seen just for grins would have been to put out just 3 counterpoise wires, and only at 2 meters long. I have to wonder how that would have went.
Mike, what is the length of your 'short' radials? On various videos, you've called them both 2 meter radials, and 2.5 meter radials. Just for grins, I put together three sets of five radials at about half the length of the Wolf River originals -- 16.5 feet. I haven't tested them yet. Thanks !
I originally cut them 2 meters but added another half meter to each one making them 2.5 meters.
@@hamradiotube Thanks !
Longer radials = better dx .... that makes sense in that the reflection is hitting copper further than radiating point for a longer bank angle (creating lower takeoff) so to speak. More short radials = denser short skip. Also makes sense.
Looks like a very small tradeoff for shortening but increasing the count of radials.
Id like to see more of the longer radials compared.
I would like to know more about the spike. How can I get or make one. Thinking of making one with a ground rod. With one of them I could go to the beach (Atlantic Ocean) and it should work good.
WRC sells them now.
I made it out of a mirror mount and an old WRC Tripod leg that I ground to a point. But WRC sells them now too.
@@hamradiotube I don't see how World Racing has to do with this antenna! I Google WRC, it came back with World Racing. I am sorry I am a dumb new hire. I am sure that there is another WRC other than the Racing. I am thinking of getting the mount and a stainless steel rod and making one. But it will take me forever to put a point on it unless I get some power tools to help.
@@donaldsmith3048 WRC - Wolf River Coils, the coil/antenna he was using in this video and is in the description. Unless this was a whoosh and I'm just gullible.
@@JasonTurnage OK! Now I feel really dumb for not putting that together! I don't remember seeing that when ordered my antenna. But I will go there and check it out. THANK YOU FOR THE HELP!
Quite interesting video but like you said if you don’t have the space for the three long counterpoise the short ones would work also. Great test.
WD5ENH
Steve
Great comparison test Mike. Good information and thanks for putting the effort into this experiment, It had to take time and your efforts are appreciated. I would like to see how said vertical would perform on a tripod putting the base of the vertical up say... six feet or more above ground and the use of one and then two raised tuned counterpoises with the ends at least 30 inches above the ground allowing the counterpoises to slope say 30 to 45 degrees. This would bring the impedance of the vertical up close to 50 ohms, AND should give the vertical at least 6dB more performance due to less ground effect and losses. (This is kind of the idea behind the Buddistick approach) Personally I am more a fan of the one or two raised counterpoise than messing around with a whole bunch of wire on the ground. It is easier to set up and I find the results are more easy to tune and very repeatable. I'd be interested in your opinion and possible test of that idea comparing the data to what you have derived in this experiment. Love your videos... alway informative and fun to watch.
I was wondering if you had more radials. Say, 6 of the longer to see if you would get better results. I know Callum says that anything over 16 is wasted effort. Just a thought.
I'm sure you would. There is a diminishing return but 6 would prob help quite a bit.
3. ;)
Maybe try and add 10mins with NO radials to the mix.
Second
I see what you did there.
I suspect that your results show a statistically insignificant difference. The expected error is equal to the Square root of the number of counts. For 500 counts this error is plus minus 23
Interesting, but I don't think this experiment demonstrates no provable difference between your samples. Suggestions: 1) Your control group should be NO COUNTERPOISE WIRES; then experimenal groups A and B as short/many, and long/few respectively. 2). keep your power LOW, like 500mW or less - maybe even 100mw if you can. I get into europe without trying even at 1W on WSPR. Consider backing off your power until you're barely getting out there, maybe 10 spots or less without counterpoise radials, then add the radials and see what happens. 3) Unless you employ statistics or some formal analysis, its extremely hard to compare two sets of data with two different set-ups on WSPR if each returns basically the same number of spots. But, if you back off the power and find a "sweet spot" with no counterpoise wires where you're hitting say 10 spots, then you add counterpoise wires and you hit 15-20 spots, then take off the counterpoise wires and you get back to 10 spots, thats a result that is convincing without stats.
good luck.
Hi Mike how about do 6 by 5m long as you did the 3 by 10m!!!