ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ธ.ค. 2022
- A video about the ubiquitous v-dipole antenna, talking about what it is, what the "V" shape is for, and if you should even use it (yes).
Links:
My website and other social media - sgcderek.github.io/
Blog post from Dan KB6NU - www.kb6nu.com/dipoles-shorter...
Article from Adam 9A4QV - lna4all.blogspot.com/2017/02/... - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
One of the most 'effective' tutorials I've seen on YT. Straight to the point, no lengthy bla bla and heaps of information. Info is the right mix between practical en theoretical info. Really well done.
Love it! For me, there's little reason to speed up your audio. You have a pleasant voice and don't waste words. Thank you for your efforts to educate us all, it's working.
Fantastic video!! Very well explained!!
I am a Telecommunications Engineering student and i am doing my final project about the performance of those different antennas. This video will help me to get through it! Thankss
Well explained, loved the use of graphics!
Wonderful videos for satellite reception
Great explanation and presentation, thank you!
Thanks!
I'm on this stage - helix next!
I have made v-pole antenna. Using nooelec product LNA. Using RTL-SDR. Using SDRSharp software. To receive FM radio broadcasts to function properly, it's must use the LNA. But after several weeks of trying to receive pictures of NOAA15, NOAA18, NOAA19, MetopB, MetopC, never got a good signal at the working frequency of the satellite. The reception location is in the middle of a field, an open area without obstructions (houses, trees). I have adjusted all parameter settings (frequency, bandwidth, etc.). Where do you think my mistake is?
Hey! Fantastic video. Could you please make one about the construction of a 70cm yagi (like you showed in the video)?
Yeah that is something i want to cover eventually, in the meantime this is a link to the calculator that was used: www.changpuak.ch/electronics/yagi_uda_antenna_DL6WU.php
How about explaining the reasons and benefits (if any?) for winding and coiling the coax near the antenna's feedpoint as seen in your pics? Also, you mentioned using a reflector element but later removed it -- did it help or not?
That's supposed to act as an RF choke and prevent the coax from acting as an antenna, but just like the reflector the improvement is situational and depends on your antenna placement
Thanks ! will be there video about QFA or DCA ?
I haven't built any of those types on my own, so I don't have the experience that would justify making a video like that. Maybe in the future but right now I want to keep focusing on more advanced topics with time
Hi, how would the effectiveness of this be affected if i used steel rather than aluminium? Thanks
that should still work but it may not be ideal due to oxidation and rust
Thanks for the quick and informative response!@@dereksgc
Sir, I am a scanner guy: (dedicated scanners, UHF/VHF aircraft radio/cb radio/marine radio) if you feel that there would be an appropriate interest by your subscribers, would you please consider making a video addressing (a wide range) of antennas that may be used for scanners. (perhaps you would include off-the-shelf scanner antennas and homemade antennas - and cabling/and connectors) Oh yes, I have done some research on multiple antenna combiners (active and passive), on splitters (active and passive), and on signal amplifiers (active of course). I have read so many conflicting reports which end up offering a myriad of conflicting suggestions: some suggest that 1 antenna for 1 scanner is the best: other data sources suggest that using a combiner, to combine the signal from many different antennas would offer an improvement: I also read that using a combiner to combine the signal of MANY antennas into 1 final output - then feeding this output into the input of a scanner may overload and damage the scanners front end. I read that (for best performance) the scanner antennas must be identical with identical lengths of cable - I read that I should be able to use a combiner (active or passive) or, or, or a splitter (1 input 2 outputs, 2 inputs, 3 or 4 outputs, 4 or more inputs, with multiple outputs)(used inverse or normal forward) to split and combine signals. Some sources suggest that a combiner is identical to a splitter - while other sources suggest that a combiner is entirely different than a splitter. (The data) It's a mess and no 1 source addresses all of these issues - they all appear to be in conflict with each other.(to some degree) Oh yes, and let me ramble for a little bit more please: if I have 4 to 6 different antennas of different configurations, combined then I want to use an amplifier to boost the signal: then once the signal is boosted, I want to use a splitter to split the boosted signal for use in/on 3 or 4 radios. I have done this, I don't know if this mess works better than a single antenna for each scanner or radio - but combining 6 antennas, amplifying the single output, then splitting it again, seems to work. There are antenna distance issues - as in separation? I'm not aware that I have damaged or am damaging the front end of the radios. I guess that my final thought is that of should I just purchase 1 super giant, very expensive off of the shelf scanner/multi-band antenna - amplify and split the signal and share between multiple radios. I hope that you can follow this line of thought: I must admit, that it confuses me. Thank you: I am a new subscriber - your channel has value. Thanks again.
I don't think having multiple antennas connected will damage anything as long as they are passive. But I think if you just use an ordinary splitter to combine the antennas it's not really going to work that well, because you would need a filtered one that has a bandpass filter on each antenna input, so every antenna can only let in the frequencies it's meant to be used with. Below 1 GHz it should be possible to make bandpass filters *relatively* easily, that could be something I take a look at in the future