Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: using my shortwave rx antenna for tx  (Read 323 times)

W1JPP

  • Member
  • Posts: 243
    • homeURL
using my shortwave rx antenna for tx
« on: January 26, 2023, 07:28:03 AM »

so I already have antennas for my tx/rx needs for my shack which is downstairs....and I put up a receive antenna for my portable shortwave thats generally upstairs

my rx antenna I ended up with is fed with a home brew 1:1 balun, fed with 75ohm RG6...about a 25' run in my upstairs room...its fed about 20' up, then the wire rises up at approx 70 degrees to 60', and then horizonal for another 40' or so...

because it was meant to be an omnidirectional rx antenna, I never measured the wire when I cut it, but guessed it would be close in length to a 1/4 wl at 160m based on my current 160m dipole

I added to radials just for fun, that are at approx 10' high, that run perpendicular to the vertical L wire, at approx the same, guessed, length of the vertical L antenna...

Out of curiosity, I wanted to see what the swr would be...so using my AEA CIA-HF analyzer, noted the following:

freq        swr
1.9         1.50
3.9         5.35
7.24         15.24
14.26      4.35
18.13       4.62
21.4        4.70
28.4        3.83

when I saw all the swr numbers around 4-5 I wondered if there was something easy I could do other than start cutting to get them down a bit, and use it as a tx antenna for an extra transceiver I have, that I would put upstairs where that feedline comes in...

I don't care about 160m, and moving that off the 1.5, as I already have a 160m dipole up...and the rig I'd be using is an older kenwood ts-520...which doesn't have 160m...I'd like to have good use on 3.9, 7.25, 14.25....

keep in mind on my other antennas, I already have the 160m dipole and an end fed (49:1) fed, 80m antenna...

I do have an extra tuner and I tested that on the various frequencies and it does get it all down to 1:1 but was thinking for simplicity sake would be nice to get the swr closer to a match without the tuner...

any suggestions if I'd like to get the swr down on 3.9 and up? transformer?
Logged

K6SDW

  • Posts: 528
    • HomeURL
Re: using my shortwave rx antenna for tx
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2023, 07:54:56 AM »

I would try an EFHW antenna designed for the HF bands plus WARC with tuner....there's a bunch of 49:1 EFHW being sold to chose from, including the ARRL's own endfed kit. I bought the MFJ-1984mp and have been happy with its performance, and no quality issues  so far....

GL/73
Logged

WB6BYU

  • Member
  • Posts: 20896
    • Practical Antennas
Re: using my shortwave rx antenna for tx
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2023, 08:28:50 AM »

Quote from: W1JPP

...was thinking for simplicity sake would be nice to get the swr closer to a match without the tuner...



First of all, remember that a tuner matches impedance, not SWR.
So to know how to match the antenna, you want to know the complex
impedance (preferably in the form R +/- jX) on each band, not just the
SWR.

Despite the current fad for such things, no transformer is going to
give a reasonable match to a 4 : 1 SWR across multiple bands, because
the impedance can vary over a wide range.  You need a very different
matching method for 12 ohms, 200 ohms, or 50 -j75 ohms, even though
they all give the same SWR.

Given the low SWR on 160m, it would seem that your wire is close to
quarter wave resonance on 160m, which generally would mean high
impedances on 40m and 80m (depending on the specific frequency).
But that will be transformed by the length of the 75 ohm coax, which
will be close to 1/4 wavelength or so on 40m.


Cutting the wire to 1/2 wavelength on 80m and feeding it as an EFHW
works because then you know the impedance is high on each band of
interest, but only if the matching is performed at the feedpoint rather
than at the shack end of the coax.


With a bit of modeling we can make some estimates as to the
actual impedances you are seeing in the shack, but that will have
to wait until after breakfast and morning appointments...


What I have done in that sort of situation is to build a switched fixed
tuner.  That is, I start with a multi-position switch, and build separate
fixed-tuned networks for each band (although I may need to get
more creative to cover most of 80m).  This does take a bit of work
to set up, but once done it just requires a flip of the bandswitch

Typically I build a simple L network using a piece of coil stock with
a clip lead for adjustment, and a variable capacitor, to determine the
required matching values.  Then I build the actual unit with an array
of tapped coils and fixed mica capacitors, or sometimes mica trimmers,
as needed for each band of interest.  (No, you don't need to build it
as messy as my example!)

In fact, I've used that same unit on at least 3 different antennas over
the last 35 years, by changing coil taps and capacitors when I put up
a different antenna.



Before autotuners were common, many marine radios used this
approach, where the antenna was manually matched (either inside
the transceiver, or in an external box) during initial setup, then the
fixed networks switched as the radio changed channels.

Takes a bit of work, but it is quite easy to use, and, unlike an
autotuner, it permits switching the antenna to different bands
without transmitting.


WA3SKN

  • Member
  • Posts: 8126
Re: using my shortwave rx antenna for tx
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2023, 02:23:16 PM »

Lets keep things simple.
For a receive only antenna, the antenna is the signal generator and the receiver is the load.  Your need for a low SWR to protect the transmitter's finals is MUCH lower here!
There could be static buildup, but I assume the 1:1 balun is Guanella and is supplying a DC ground pass.
And there could be a signal overload, depending on the receiver and frequency planned.
You could add a variable inductor in series to electrically lengthen the antenna, or you could add a variable capacitor to electrically shorten it.  But SWR is not too important in this situation.

-Mike.
Logged

N8TGQ

  • Member
  • Posts: 50
Re: using my shortwave rx antenna for tx
« Reply #4 on: January 28, 2023, 07:01:31 AM »

 Unsure what your actual antenna length is. Some work better than others.
Here's a site that has a lot of info on random wires:

https://www.hamuniverse.com/randomwireantennalengths.html

I have used all the lengths up to 71 feet, and hey all worked well. I use a simple MFJ 971 tuner to feed it. I use the 29' length right now wrapped around my apartment ceiling and just got CA with 3 watts yesterday on 20 meters.

Put your tuner on the wire and run some test with the Reverse Beacon Network. You may be surprised!
Logged

AI5BC

  • Posts: 456
    • HomeURL
Re: using my shortwave rx antenna for tx
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2023, 08:56:55 AM »

Lets keep things simple.
For a receive only antenna, the antenna is the signal generator and the receiver is the load.  Your need for a low SWR to protect the transmitter's finals is MUCH lower here!

100% true but leads others to drawing the wrong conclusion. In fact, among CB and hams, most think SWP is not important on a RX antenna. It is just as important as the TX. Otherwise, you have a crocodile site, all mouth and no ears. The transmission system is not balanced or optimized.

What is important whether it is TX or RX is the antenna is coupling efficiency one end to the other, it adds to the insertion losses. With a Return Loss of -10dB (SWR = 2 CB lingo)) is a 90% efficient with an impedance of either 100 or 25 ohms.  With a RL = -6dB or SWR = 3 for CB operators, you are down to 75% efficiency and cooking your Transmitter finals operating into a 17 or 150 ohm load. Receiver does not know it has cotton in its ears nor does not care. Operators hears something and does not know what they are missing.

Logged

W1JPP

  • Member
  • Posts: 243
    • homeURL
Re: using my shortwave rx antenna for tx
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2023, 10:39:24 AM »

Lets keep things simple.
For a receive only antenna, the antenna is the signal generator and the receiver is the load.  Your need for a low SWR to protect the transmitter's finals is MUCH lower here!

100% true but leads others to drawing the wrong conclusion. In fact, among CB and hams, most think SWP is not important on a RX antenna. It is just as important as the TX. Otherwise, you have a crocodile site, all mouth and no ears. The transmission system is not balanced or optimized.

What is important whether it is TX or RX is the antenna is coupling efficiency one end to the other, it adds to the insertion losses. With a Return Loss of -10dB (SWR = 2 CB lingo)) is a 90% efficient with an impedance of either 100 or 25 ohms.  With a RL = -6dB or SWR = 3 for CB operators, you are down to 75% efficiency and cooking your Transmitter finals operating into a 17 or 150 ohm load. Receiver does not know it has cotton in its ears nor does not care. Operators hears something and does not know what they are missing.

Overall as an rx antenna I’ve been happy. I can run to the shack and compare qso’s on my rx antenna to my rx/tx tuned antennas.

Still I may swap out my 1:1 balun, switch to a 49:1 transformer and cut the wire to be a 1/2 wave on 80m so I get better resonance on multiple hf bands. Just in case it may improve rx and also serve as a better tx antenna if I ever want.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up