Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Q52 versus Hexbeam for NOISE  (Read 3767 times)
NW6V
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« on: April 16, 2013, 01:36:30 PM »

I live in an urban QTH with lots of noise.

My current antenna is a low-mounted (30') inverted-V. Based on what I glean from the net, it's mixture of vertical and horizontal polarization components makes it more susceptible to noise pickup than horizontally polarized antennas. Stretched out horizontal wires are out of the question. It's too small here.

I'm in the last hours, days, weeks before putting up a roof-mounted horizontally polarized directional (rotatable) antenna.

The choices have boiled down to either a Q52 from N6BT, or a hexbeam (Traffie specifically).  Note: I know about the delivery/service issues regarding N6BT products and don't want to rehash that in this context. Likewise, the choice of a Traffie over a K4KIO is largely based on physical size - the 3 foot smaller diameter is important at this QTH - so I don't want to rehash that, either.

The XYL greatly prefers the clean look of the Q52 to the "non traditional" look of the hexbeam (In fairness, given where we live, her point is not lost on me). Otherwise the hexbeam would already be up.)

So, the antenna change was largely motivated by a desire to alleviate noise (not QRM).

And in that context, is there any reason to believe that one of these antennas would provide better noise rejection than the other?

73, Chris NW6V
Logged
WB2WIK
Member

Posts: 20561




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2013, 02:05:28 PM »

Just I guess, but I suspect the Q52 might be better in this regard because it's bandswitched and only tuned to one band at a time using selective circuits within the two "matchbox" units.

However a lot of this may be closely related to how high above ground you install either antenna, and also what the noise source(s) really is(are).  There's not a lot of atmospheric noise on 20 through 10 meters unless there are lightning storms in the area and these bands can be pretty "quiet" (my noise level at home using an 8 element LPDA is usually in the S1 area on these bands), so it's been my experience that most "high noise level" issues are locally created and man-made.  Either eliminating those sources or moving the antenna farther away from them helps a lot!

Logged
NW6V
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2013, 02:27:03 PM »

Thanks. Interesting observation about the possible impact of the matching systems; I see your point.

Either antenna will be at about 30 feet, 10 feet or so above a shingle roof.

I'm speaking almost entirely of locally man-made electrical noise - The neighborhood is zoned R7 - seven residences per acre... so an astonishing number of electrical devices, power supplies, computers and whatnot are all within rock-throwing distance. I've been working on remediating those as much as possible for the last 8 months or so - but am at a point of greatly diminishing returns in that regard. Cut better than 2 S units of racket out of my own QTH!

Point is, I don't expect to find a magic bullet in regard to additional electrical noise alleviation - and I'm about to have a practical lesson in the degree to which the antenna choice can have an impact. Thus trying to optimize the choice to the degree possible (practical)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!