Fractal Magic DIY HDTV Antenna

After reading an article about the use of fractal mathematics in the design of cell phone antennas that have incredible bandwidth in spite of their extremely small size, I began to experiment with using a very simple fractal pattern, the Koch Snowflake, as the basis for an easy to build indoor HDTV antenna. The result of that experimentation is presented here as what I believe to be not only the best DIY HDTV antenna, but the also the simplest to build, not only in terms of the materials needed, but also in the labor required. As the holder of an Extra Class amateur radio license, I know there is no such thing as a "magic" antenna, but I started referring to this antenna as the magic antenna when I discovered that it had such amazing bandwidth, covering digital channels 2 through 60. So, with that in mind, let's get started.

Step 1: Gather The Needed Materials

Things you will need: 1 - A piece of poster board that measures 15-3/4" x 6" (400mm x 150mm). A 24" x 28" sheet of poster board, enough to make six of these antennas, can be purchased for about a dollar in stores selling arts and crafts supplies. This is the same material used to make cake boxes and the gift boxes used for shirts and blouses. 2 - A pattern for making the antenna (download the pdf file). 3 - Some Scotch Tape. 4 - Scissors 5 - A map pin or other sharp pointy tool for punching holes in the poster board. 6 - 3.2 meters (10-1/2 feet) of small diameter (22 or 24 AWG) copper or aluminum wire. A 100-foot roll of 22 or 24 AWG uninsulated copper wire can be purchased at almost any hardware store for less than $5.00; however, there are many other sources for copper wire, e.g. the field windings of burnt out or discarded electric motors. At the time of this writing a package containing 30-feet of suitable aluminum wire can be purchased at Hobby Lobby for $1.99. 7- A pair of small crimp connectors and pliers or other tool for crimping the connectors. 8 - A length of 300 Ohm Twin Lead antenna wire and a matching transformer with screw terminals*, or...

9 - An in-line 300 Ohm to 75 Ohm matching transformer* and a length of 75 Ohm coax cable. Misc. - A screw driver for attaching 300 Ohm lead-in wire to the matching transformer and a craft knife, or other knife with small sharp blade, for cutting slots A & B into the poster board. . *Note: I've had excellent results with eliminating the 300 Ohm Twin Lead antenna wire and the matching transformer and attaching the center conductor and shielding of RG-6 coax directly to the separate sides of the antenna. The use of the 300 Ohm lead-in wire and matching transformer make connecting the antenna wires to the coax cable an easier task, but they do not seem to be required to match the impedence of the antenna to that of the 75 Ohm transmission line. Step 2: Download and Print Antenna Template

Print out one copy each of Part 1 and Part 2 of the antenna template. Make sure your printer properties are set to print the images at 100% rather than Fit To Page or at some reduced size. If you are not sure of your printer settings, print only Part 1 of the template and check the side-to-side and top-tobottom distances on the printed sheet with a ruler before printing Part 2. Note that the measurements on the antenna template are in millimeters, not inches. Trim the left hand edge of Part 2, lay it on top of Part 1 being careful to align the printed pattern on both parts, and tape the pages together to form the complete template. Trim the excess paper from the edges of the template. At one corner of the poster board, align two of the template edges with two edges of the poster board and tape the template to the poster board. Cut the poster board along the edges of the template and re-tape the template to the poster board along the edges where the tape was cut.

Step 3: Punch Holes & Cut Slots In Poster Board

Using a couple of layers of shipping carton cardboard as padding, use the map pin or other sharp pointy object to punch a hole through the poster board at each of the locations marked on the template with a dot at the points of the wire pattern. Using an X-Acto knife or other small small sharp blade, cut through the template and poster board to form slots A & B. After punching all of the holes and cutting the slots, remove the pattern from the poster board.

Step 4: Lace The Wire Onto The Poster Board

Measure and cut a piece of wire that is 1.6 meters (5' 4) in length, and starting at the hole marked Start Here on either side of the template, insert about inch of wire into the hole and fold it sharply so that it stays on the back side of the form. Then following the pattern on the template, alternating between front (solid lines on template) and back (dashed lines on the template) sides of the poster board, lace the wire around the wire pattern. Take your time doing this, being careful to not let the wire kink as you pull it through the holes. Keep the wire as tight and straight as possible between the holes. Lacing the wire from one hole through the next takes less and less time and gets easier as the amount of unlaced wire decreases. When the wire has been passed through the last hole in pattern, trim the end of it so as to leave about inch sticking out the back of the poster board one side of the lead-in wire will be connected to this end-wire. Repeat this step on the other side of the poster board. Tip: Tape down the end-wire of the first half of the antenna to the back of the poster board so that you don't stick yourself with it while wiring the second half of the antenna.

Step 5: Connect Lead-in Wire To Antenna

There are a number of ways in which the lead-in wire, coax cable or in-line matching transformer can be attached to the antenna. The methods I have used are listed here, and as far as I can tell judging by the performance of the antenna, all of these work equally well. So, just choose the method that best matches the tools and materials you have at hand. First strip about to inch (6 to 12 mm) of insulation from both wires of the 300 twin lead, from the braided shielding and center conductor of the coax, or from both leads of an in-line matching transformer. Then use one of the following methods to connect each side of the lead-in to the antenna. Crimp Connectors: Insert one side of the lead-in and one of the antenna end-wires into one crimp connector and crimp with a pair of pliers or crimping tool. Then repeat this procedure to connect together the other side of the lead-in and the other antenna end-wire. Soldering Iron: Twist together one side of the lead-in and one of the antenna end-wires and solder them together. Then repeat this procedure to connect together the other side of the lead-in and the other antenna end-wire. A Pressure Connection Using Small Screws, Washers and Nuts Punch two holes near the ends of the antenna wire and insert a #4-32 screw with two flat washers into each of these holes and put a nut onto each screw. Insert one side of the lead-in and one of the antenna end-wires between the flat washers on one screw and tighten the screw using a small screw driver. Then repeat this procedure to connect together the other side of the lead-in and the other antenna end-wire.

Step 6: Or, Connect RG-6 Coax to Antenna

Optionally a length of RG-6 coax can be connected directly to the end-wires of the antenna as shown in the photo. Strip about 3/4 inch (19mm) of the outer insulation from the end of the coax being carefull not to cut through the braided shielding. Pull the braided shield back from the end of the coax and twist all the wires of the shield together as tightly as you can (finger tight is fine) and trim the end so that the remainer is the same length as the end-wires of the antenna. Strip about a 1/4 inch of the inner insulation from the center conductor and bend the center conductor up at a 90-degree angle. Lay the coax next to the antenna end-wires so the twisted shield and center conductor are both aligned with (i.e. running along side) the end-wires of the antenna, and all the wires are sticking straight up from the surface of the poster board, so that the wires can be connected. In this illustration, crimp connectors were used to connect the end-wires to the coax because the wires used to make the antenna are aluminum, and it is really difficult to solder to aluminum. If you used copper wire to build the antenna, and have a soldering iron and solder at hand, just twist the center conductor of the coax together with one of the antenna end-wires and solder them together, then twist the coax shield together with the other antenna end-wire and solder them together. Now that the coax is connected to the antenna, you no longer need to use a matching transformer as shown in Step 9, and, if you are going to put the antenna into an empty CD storage case, you can drill or punch a 1/4 inch hole near the bottom of the lid of the CD case and use the method shown in the 3 photos here to provide strain relief for the coax-to-antenna connections. Step 7: Lash Lead-in To Poster Board

Lay the lead-in flat on the poster board, and near the place where the lead-in is connected to the antenna end-wires, punch a hole large enough for a cable tie or twist tie to pass through on both sides of the lead-in. Then secure the lead-in firmly to the poster board with a small cable tie or twist tie.

Step 8: Insert Tabs A & B Into Slots A & B

Roll the poster board into a cylinder, insert Tabs A & B into Slots A & B, and fold the tabs back on the inside of the cylinder. A little Scotch brand tape on the seams works wonders in maintaining the cylindrical shape of the antenna.

Step 9: Attach Matching Transformer To Lead-in

Attach the matching transformer to the free end of the lead-in wire.

Step 10: Personalize Your Antenna

The completed antenna fits comfortably into an empty 100-count CD/DVD storage box, and this in turn can be used to display family photos, beautiful scenery cut from last year's calendar, or to display your favorite sports picture.

tigers58 (author) in reply to caitlinsdadFeb 12, 2013. 9:48 AM Reply I designed it to be omnidirectional, hence the cylindrical shape, but I've noticed that it is not completely omnidirectional - turning it will improve the reception of some more distant stations. Turning it on its side makes it much more directional than placing it in an upright position. The website Antenna Web (http://www.antennaweb.org/Stations) shows that I should be able to receive up to 42 channels from 25 over-the-air stations at my location, and with this antenna I'm receiving 42 over-the-air stations. Thanks for your comment!

goodforcatfish says: Feb 12, 2013. 4:57 PM Reply a simple and functional build, kudos. I am off to the craft store for some board now, thank you. tigers58 (author) in reply to goodforcatfishFeb 12, 2013. 5:47 PM Reply Thank you for your reply. I'm hoping to get several people to build the antenna and then report on their results, e.g. performance of the antenna and the distance from their homes to the broadcast transmission towers. technovative says: Feb 13, 2013. 10:55 PM Reply Your first Ible and you executed it like a pro, well done! I like the idea of forming the fractal element into a cylinder to make it more omnidirectional, and have a large surface area in a compact space. I experimented with with a small flat-panel fractal antenna that yielded poor results, your design has given me inspiration for future antenna experiments. Dream Dragon says: Feb 14, 2013. 12:22 AM Reply This is really interesting, I saw a TV program about the fractal antenna's in Mobile phones last year but this is the first time I've seen anything practical for the everyday kind of user. It's AWESOME! I understand your reservations about the word "Magic" in this application, but I read "Magic Fractal Antenna" to suggest that this was an antenna that exploited the "magical" properties of fractals, rather than an antenna that was magical in itself. It's a subtle semantic difference, but I think it's a valid description if it delivers even NEARLY as impressive results as you seem to be getting.

Regarding scaling, the joy of fractals is that they scale very well. I'm not sure of the technical details of Regarding scaling, the joy of fractals is that they scale very well. I'm not sure of the technical details of the antenna,but scaling a fractal is not quite a simple matter of just making the whole thing bigger, you need to ad extra iterations, but it shouldn't be a major issue to make it work for whatever scheme you feel you need. nozmoking says: Feb 14, 2013. 1:00 AM Reply The optical media container idea is a nice touch. It also keeps the "what the heck is that?" questions to a minimum when entertaining guests - it simply becomes a neat way to display photos or memorabilia. tigers58 (author) in reply to nozmokingFeb 14, 2013. 5:30 AM Reply Thanks for your comment. Yes, the antenna works just fine without putting it in a container, and while testing various configurations I have taped it to window panes, slipped it over my wife's flower vases, and even used a spring-loaded clothes pin to hang it from a curtain (not a way to gain your wife's approval of your project). Realizing that it would fit inside an empty CD storage case was a piece of luck as it makes handling and positioning the antenna much easier, and like you have pointed out, turns something you may have tossed into a recycle bin into a useful media for displaying photos. tigers58 (author) in reply to Dream DragonFeb 14, 2013. 6:26 AM Reply Thanks for your cogent remarks about the "magic" of fractal antennas. I didn't want anyone to be mislead by my use of the word "magic" that I used in reference to the bandwidth of the antenna. The advantages of this antenna are that it is to a large degree omni-directional, and covers a wide bandwidth while being smaller, and I think more attractive, than traditional "rabbit ear" antennas. I haven't had the opportunity to test the range of the antenna, but I don't believe it's going to magically pull in signals from a greater distance than a larger, directional, hi-gain, narrower bandwidth antenna like a yagi or log periodic. The question of scaling the antenna up is an interesting one, and I agree that extra iterations are definitely needed and not just enlarging the dimensions, but adding more iterations and increasing the length of the antenna elements can be done without increasing the physical size of the antenna. I made one using 2 more iterations but keeping the same length of wire, and that produced a much smaller sized antenna. The performance didn't improve, but the difficulty of punching so many more holes and threading the wire through them seemed to increase exponentially. :-) mjones says: Feb 14, 2013. 9:30 AM Reply Where can I download the patterns? avengine says: Feb 14, 2013. 9:46 AM Reply how good is the reception? how far you are from the station? I am in canada and the station is 30km away. right now I use the antenna on the roof and get 10.

urant says: Feb 14, 2013. 9:54 AM Reply Wow, a very beautiful design. I took a class in school (antenna design) but we never got into fractal antennas. Antenna design is hard. If you try to design new shapes, the math gets really ugly (or beautiful if you like math like me :D ) What I just love of your design is the combination of high tech, a simple build and a use of recyclable materials. It's one of the best examples I've seen of the blending of all three. tigres58, I salute you imperio says: Feb 14, 2013. 10:00 AM Reply also works with Wi-Fi? rwohleb says: Feb 14, 2013. 11:03 AM Reply The partial directionality of this design might be from the size of the segments compared to the curvature of the cylinder. A denser koch snowflake might fix this. Plus, you could get a 1/2 wavelength antenna in a smaller cylinder. The downside is the build would be harder. I'm wondering if a variation on the hilbert curve might be easier to build and have better non-directionality performance. johngriswold says: Feb 14, 2013. 11:08 AM Reply Very cool. Got one for 20m? John KK1X epadget says: Feb 14, 2013. 11:22 AM Reply Awesome design! This will be my first ever Instructables build. Do you have pictures of "attaching the center conductor and shielding of RG-6 coax directly to the separate sides of the antenna."? tigers58 (author) in reply to rwohlebFeb 14, 2013. 1:06 PM Reply Thanks for your comments. These are all good thoughts and ideas. As I stated in another reply, I build a smaller one with a more dense pattern (two more iterations than this one), and it proved to be just too hard to punch all those holes and thread the wire through them. I gave some thought to using a conductive ink to draw the pattern, but never got further with the idea than thinking about it. I saw an article on the Internet somewhere that gave the results of tests made using the Radio Shack conductive ink pen, and it was said that it worked best with larger thicker lines. That didn't seem too conducive to use for an intricate fractal pattern. I do appreciate the good ideas through because I haven't stopped trying to improve upon this idea. tigers58 (author) in reply to johngriswoldFeb 14, 2013. 2:09 PM Reply Thanks for the comment. Maybe one could be built that fits inside a five gallon plastic bucket. :-) That would be a fun project, and maybe the answer for a lot of hams that have moved into situations where they can't put up antennas. says: Feb 14, 2013. 7:47 PM Reply

Can I use it as a scanner or amateur radio antenna?What should I change if I want to receive different frequencies? rkelle7602 says: Feb 14, 2013. 8:15 PM Reply This is a great Instrucable! I've made three homemade antennas, including a fractal one, and this is the coolest one yet. It's a fantastic design! It does tend to be a bit directional but it does seem to work better than the one directional fractal antenna I made earlier. Thanks for sharing your design! tigers58 (author) in reply to avengineFeb 14, 2013. 8:25 PM Reply OK, so at 30km you're 18.75 miles from the station. Several of the stations here have the broadcast towers on the same mountain top 31 miles (49.6km) from my location here. As the picture of the Setup Screen on here somewhere shows, I'm receiving 42 digital channels and 0 analog channels with the antenna indoors. With the exception of 5 channels of religious programming on a LP station in the area, all of the pictures are beautiful. I am doing a video for posting on YouTube to show the antenna in action. tigers58 (author) in reply to urantFeb 14, 2013. 8:29 PM Reply Wow! Thanks for the kind words. I never had a course in antenna design. All I know about antenna design was learned out of ARRL books and from the Internet. onrust says: Feb 15, 2013. 4:24 AM Reply I'm all about some free TV. Thanks for the post tigers58 (author) in reply to rkelle7602Feb 15, 2013. 5:26 AM Reply Thank you for your comments, and thanks for your report on the performance of how this antenna works for you. I've found that the antennas that have the coax connected directly to the antenna without the 300 Ohm twin lead and matching transformer are a lot less directional. I'm going to try to add an additional optional step(s) to the Instructable showing how to connect the coax and run it out the side of the CD storage box lid to provide some strain relief for the coaxto-antenna connection. tigers58 (author) in reply to onrustFeb 15, 2013. 5:33 AM Reply Yes, I'm very much in favor of keeping broadcast TV alive. I don't like paying for something I can get for free, and subscribing to the local channels from a cable or satellite doesn't eliminate a single commercial from the programming. Thanks for you comment. onrust in reply to tigers58Feb 15, 2013. 6:12 AM Reply I understand. As much as I hate NFL Football, I DO NOT think Americans have to pay for cable or go to a bar just to watch the Super Bowl. Its just horrible.

tigers58 (author) in reply to Feb 15, 2013. 8:34 AM Reply I've had a couple of questions about using the antenna on 2-meters and 70cm bands, and since both of those bands are tucked away in the middle of the TV bands, I think it would work fine on

those bands. I would love to have someone give a report on the kind of SWR they get when a 2meter and/or 70cm transmitter is connected to this antenna. jimvandamme in reply to imperioFeb 16, 2013. 5:52 AM Reply WiFi is pretty narrow band, so you don't need a fractal antenna. The dimensions are small, too, so it's hard to build in fractal. There are lots of WiFi antenna designs out there. jrm8069 says: Feb 16, 2013. 1:13 PM Reply Ok, I built the antenna to your specifications, except I didn't put it in an empty DVD container. I have one, but it is evidently a smaller dimension than the ones you use, because my antenna is a little too large. It's for my kitchen TV, so I put the antenna on the top shelf of the cabinet above the TV and snaked the coax down, and out to the back of the set. My reception is much improved over the rabbit ears I was using. My TV used to freeze and go blank if I stood near it. Presumably I was blocking the signal. Problem solved. Thanks for a great instructable that worked. John M.

osterac says: Feb 16, 2013. 2:40 PM Reply Alright, I built the antenna and tried it in various places. Here are my results. For reference, the attic bunny ears on the second story are able to pull in 14 channels. On the living room TV, with no amp, I was able to pull in 2 channels. I then tried it in the attic. With the amp, I was able to pull in 7 channels, 5 of them were rated 5/6 and 2 were rated 6/6. With the bunny ears, all of those channels were rated 6/6 in media center. All other channels were rated 1/6, no signal. Without the amp, I was able to pull in 2 channels. I must have done something wrong. The wire I used has a thin green vernier on it. Could that be the problem? I have several rolls of thin wire that I chose from, but I do know that they have a thin vernier on them as insulation. I thought it was thin enough to not be a problem. I took apart a DC motor from an RC helicopter and was going to use that, but the wire was pretty thin and I figured that would have a vernier on it too, otherwise when they wrapped it all the wrappings would short and you would essentially just have a big hunk of metal instead of a wrapping of wire. Would you advise that I try this again with wire I can be sure is un-insulated? If so, should I go with wire from the DC motor? Have you tried it with wire from a DC motor? If not, I'd rather just do whatever you did. I guess you said you went to a hardware store, that sounds good. I am in an somewhat suburban area, so there aren't a lot of stations. Even the basic ones are pretty far, ABC is 70 miles away. It took a lot of tweaking to get the bunny ears just right. Me up in the attic with my smart phone connected to my computer via remote desktop, monitoring the signal strength... a little to the left...

osterac in reply to osteracFeb 16, 2013. 2:47 PM Reply Also: I couldn't get it to fit into the CD spindle I had. I think the one I had might have been slightly tapered. When I printed the template, as well, I printed it without scaling and it came out too big. I eventually had to print it at 97% to get the width to measure 150mm. gcai_fwb says: Feb 16, 2013. 3:08 PM Reply Brilliant! simple and effective - making one of these in short order and will send test results druwin says: Feb 16, 2013. 5:08 PM Reply First Off I see that those whos final cylinder is not fitting its because it looks like you did not cut on the cut lines. You should be able to trim out. I want to say to the inventor of this antenna.Get a patent. This is the most remarkable device, in design and simplicity. I put on together today. I live on an Island and there are only two channels you can get from Victoria/Vancouver Canada. This thing works like a GEM!!!!! BRILLIANT CONCEPT!! While its easy to build and make. This takes patience and perserverance vs hammer and nails kind of person. I can sew button on your pants you can probably do this. Again Brilliant design concept. Hope Instructables website takes note and makes your design a showcase. Give me your email and I can send you some video I took to post. Might be helpful to others. Also the trimline to top points right on the edge are really, really close to the edge and having at least half inch would be better as its prone to tearing if not careful. Not sure it would fit in case if you do that but just thought I would add my two cents tigers58 (author) in reply to osteracFeb 16, 2013. 5:44 PM Reply The thin green vernier is, unless I miss my guess, insulation. If that's correct, all you have to do to get a lot better is to scrape off the green vernier on both ends of the wires that connect to the lead-in wires. Two days ago I discovered that the TV in my living room has a built in signal strength readout for digital channels, and that has added a whole new dimension to my testing of the antenna. I concluded a series of long side-by-side tests of an antenna build using 300 Ohm twin lead using a matching transformer and one built with no matching transformer and with the coax connected directly to the antenna. I was also testing how omni-directional each antenna was by pointing the gap between the ends of the antennas to each of the cardinal directions and stepping through all the channels recording the signal strength readings. What I found with all of this was that the antenna works best and is more omni-directional when the matching transformer in not used and the coax is connected directly to the antenna. Seems like the matching transformer is attenuating the signal. Let me know about the method you used to connect the antenna, coax of twin lead, and about the green vernier. OK?. tigers58 (author) in reply to jrm8069Feb 16, 2013. 5:54 PM Reply Looks like you did a great job on the installation. From you photo, it looks like there is a log of material on both ends of the cylinder beyond the antenna wires. I missed up in the build instructions by not telling people to trim the pattern to the 150mm width before taping it to the poster board and trimming the poster board to that width. The height of the antenna should be

150mm with about 3 to 4mm of poster board edge on each side above the peaks of the wire. My mistake! Thanks for you report. I'm glad that it is an improvement for you. Putting it in a cabinet like that is a great idea. LordGormyr in reply to imperioFeb 16, 2013. 6:04 PM Reply i would like to see if it works with Wifi too... i live in an area where there is free wifi but its barly with in my cards reach i need to find a cheap and "easy" way to boost the input signal tigers58 (author) in reply to druwinFeb 16, 2013. 6:36 PM Reply Thank you very much for the report, and for the good words. I'm egocentric enough that I like hearing people say things like "BRILLIANT CONCEPT." I'm also very happy that it is working for other people. I had begun to fear that I was living in the one and only "sweet spot" for this antenna. I think I could move the trim lines out a few more mm on each side and still fit the antenna into a CD case, and I'll probably do that. Thanks for the suggestion. I'm interested in getting the video, and will try the Privite Message thing to send you my email address. cody305 says: Feb 16, 2013. 8:21 PM Reply I am very interested in making one of these. Do these antennas require "line-of-sight" to the broadcast antenna, and thus the higher you put it, the better? For example, putting it up in the attic with a downlead through the ceiling to the TV ? I have an old UHF antenna (looks similar to a HDTV DB4) that works pretty well for getting HDTV stations (approx 25 miles away); would the Magic DIY HDTV antenna work better than a UHF antenna? Is there a difference in wavelength (and hence antenna dimensions) between HDTV stations and the old UHF stations? Thanks for posting this instructable! osterac in reply to tigers58Feb 16, 2013. 10:01 PM Reply I soldered the ends that connect to the lead-in wires. I tinned them first, so all of the insulation was melted off. I can try without a transformer, will it make a big difference? tigers58 (author) in reply to cody305Feb 17, 2013. 5:20 AM Reply Thanks for your comment and questions. UHF signals do propagate mainly by line-ofsight, and in general, the higher the antenna, the better the reception. The HDTV DB4 antenna has a reflector behind the "bow tie" receiving elements, and will pick up signals from stations in front of the antenna better than signals from stations in back of, or to the sides of, the antenna. There was no change to the frequencies being used for broadcast TV, just a change in mode of transmission from analog to digital. If most, or all, of the stations in your area are in one direction from your home, the DIY fractal antenna will not work better for receiving UHF signals than the HDTV DB4 antenna you have. The Fractal "Magic" antenna was designed to be omni-directional (i.e. receives signals from all directions) and, due to its wide bandwidth, will receive signals from both VHF and UHF channels. In this area, we are blessed with an abundance of broadcast stations that I can receive using the Fractal Magic DIY HDTV Antenna: VHF channels (2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 12) in addition to UHF channels (14, 20, 23, 25, 26, 28, 31, 38, 41, 50, and 59). Almost all of these channels have sub-

channels that greatly increase the number of actual channels we can watch, e.g. instead of receiving one channel 6 PBS channel as provided by the satellite provider, there are 3 PBS channel 6 channels - same thing for PBS channel 12. What this means to a retired person like myself, who no longer has small children at home, is that I can watch adult programming on the PBS channels at any time during the day. Bless you Colorado PBS! :-) Sorry, I didn't mean to get into a rant there. I hope that in the middle of all this verbiage, I answered all your questions. tigers58 (author) in reply to osteracFeb 17, 2013. 6:40 AM Reply I crunched all the numbers recorded in the test I described in my previous reply and the difference between the coax only antenna and the one with 300 Ohm lead-in and matching transformer was a 9.1 point increase in the average overall signal strength readings. I don't know how the 0-100 signal strength numbers relates to readings that would be given by an S-meter, and so, I don't know how that 9.1 increase in the average translates into dB of signal gain. So, is that a big difference? I don't know. Except for the total dropout of one LP station, I could see no difference in the quality of the pictures, but since I was stepping through the channels as quickly as possible while recording the signal strength numbers, there could have been big differences in picture quality hidden behind the big setup window displayed in the middle of the screen. One thing I did note, to my dismay, was that pointing the place on the antenna where the connections are made, the "gap" directly in the direction of a station's tower really knocked the signal from that station way down. The problem may not be a problem with the materials you used, or with the use of a matching transformer, but just a indication of the effective range of the antenna. I've had no opportunity to really test the range of this antenna and was hoping to get range vs. performance information from people that built the antenna. I really appreciate the time and effort you have put into this project and hope you continue to report on your testing of the antenna. Thanks again! donhugo says: Feb 17, 2013. 12:06 PMReply Well done! I made one and it worked very well. We live in a low area (suburb of Atlanta, GA), but I picked up 20 channels. I jammed the antenna outside the basement door between the wall and the light to see if it would receive anything. I would rate the reception on most channels as good to excellent. I hope to mount it on the highest gable point and see if I pick up additional channels. Thanks for a great "ible". tigers58 (author) in reply to gcai_fwbFeb 17, 2013. 4:05 PMReply Thanks for taking the time to post a comment. I'm looking forward to hearing how it works for you. tigers58 (author) in reply to jimvandammeFeb 17, 2013. 4:41 PMReply Thank you so very much for this informed answer to the Wi-Fi question. As I have said elsewhere in these comments, the only wi-fi device I have is a Kindle e-book reader, and there is no provision that I know of on it for connecting an external antenna. So, up to seeing your comment here, the only reasonable answer I could give was "I don't know." :-) tigers58 (author) in reply to epadgetFeb 17, 2013. 5:29 PMReply Yes, I added the pictures of attaching the coax to the instructable as an addition optional step. Thanks for the good words. tigers58 (author) in reply to mjonesFeb 17, 2013. 5:31 PMReply

The Pattern is a PDF file with its icon at the bottom of the "Download And Print The Pattern" page. jimvandamme in reply to tigers58Feb 17, 2013. 6:27 PMReply Pringle & soup can antennas work pretty well, so does a simple paraboloid reflector around your regular antenna. Mostly, you need an indication of how much power you're getting, at least relatively, so you can see if you're improving it (and aiming correctly). Your TV fractal won't give any gain over a simple dipole; could be much worse. The picture is coincidentally me running an s band antenna that's 20 feet in diameter. I always wondered if we could pick up the motel wifi a mile away, but never tried. We did hit the moon with 300 watts. cody305 in reply to tigers58Feb 18, 2013. 1:09 AMReply What you said about the VHF channels has stoked my curiosity - are they digital (HDTV) or do they use the old "analog" data? I thought all channels had to go digital - HDTV. Are these VHF channels some local businesses that don't have to be digital? If they are analog, would you receive them with an "old" (pre-HDTV) tv tuner ? What type of programs do they have? I don't know if there are any VHF channels where I live (Central Florida) because I had to reconnect my antenna on the TV from the analog input to the HDTV input when the channel change occurred, and I never had a reason to put an antenna back on the analog input. Maybe I am missing some great shows here! tigers58 (author) in reply to jimvandammeFeb 18, 2013. 5:17 AMReply Alright! Good work on the moon shot! I've given some thought about a parabolic reflector around this antenna, but haven't had a chance to figure out what size reflector would be required and how far away from the antenna to put it. It seems that the curvature of the reflector and its distance from the receiving element would be dependant upon the frequency of the signal, so I'm not sure about what would be needed to cover the VHF and UHF TV frequencies. Thanks again for you input. tigers58 (author) in reply to AnschutzMar 8, 2013. 3:07 PMReply Great build! And a great bit of "scavenging" for the thin plastic form. Thanks for the follow up report. Please report back on the UV resistant paint and how that works. In trying to find a solution to the UV problem, I discovered that the highly reflective, chrome looking Duck tape blocks absolutely none of the signal when applied to the outside of the CD storage case, and should provide ample UV protection. I don't know how well it would stand up to weathering since I haven't had a chance to put an antenna with it as a UV shield outside yet. I also used silicon caulk to seat around the edges of the case on the antenna I have outside here. It had been up there through two blizzards with snow and high winds and is showing no signs of wear, nor signs of signal degradation. Now I've got to go over to the Dollar store and see if I can find some of those kiddie place mats. :-) sollyman says: Aug 10, 2013. 3:06 PMReply Cute size, but lacks the reception of my Gray-Hoverman, getting only 6 of the 9 stations we watch. Good, but not advisable for fringe areas. I would suggest the G-H for rural 'fringe' reception. I am also using a Channel Plus DA-500A amp, the amp being necessary for most stations. gvhorn says: Aug 10, 2013. 7:54 AMReply KUDOS!!! I've cut the cord on cable because of the constant annual increases in the cable bill. I live in the ft. Lauderdale/Miami area where there are a mix of uhf/vhf tv stations. The vhf stations ch 7(Fox) and ch 10 (ABC). I was unable to get both of them at the same time with the Winegard flat wave antenna and other amplified ones that I tried. That's the reason I became interested in your fractal cylinder omnidirectional design. I'm happy to say that I can now receive all the channels I'm interested in without making any antenna adjustments. The reception of all

channels is clear and strong. I've now made three of them, the first one per your instructions, and the next two out of clear plastic pretzel containers with the top and bottoms cut off. As your daughter suggested the copper fractal design can now be seen and is quite attractive! I had to increase the diagram by 20%(cut and paste) to fit. The plastic cylinder is light weight, flexible, and attractive. As someone suggested, it probably would fit inside a lamp shade nicely. Your right the design is not 100% omnidirectional. However, by pointing the open space with cable at the weakest channels it increases signal strength and vhf ch reception. Again conrats on your innovative antenna design! tarkan_ says: Feb 17, 2013. 10:18 AMReply I loved the last trick with the personalizing touch! Great work! Do you think this antenna would improve WiFi signals too? tigers58 (author) in reply to tarkan_Feb 17, 2013. 4:00 PMReply thanks you for the kind words. I don't know about the wi-fi signals, and I have gotten this question several times. I have a Kindle, but I have no idea how to go about attaching an external antenna to it. PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 27, 2013. 2:14 AMReply "A Wi-Fi signal occupies five channels in the 2.4 GHz band. " - Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi - So, if you were going to make a WiFi antenna in this form the wire lengths would need to be shortened. UHF TV is from 470 MHz (bottom of Ch 14) to 746 MHz (Top of Ch 59). Assuming that tigers58 designed for the lowest freq of 470 MHz and used a wire length of ? (He used 3.2 m ~ 10.5') Each "side" was 1.6 m ~ 5.25' I don't know where these numbers come from. A full wavelength at 470 MHz is 0.64m, 2.09', and 25.125" (25 & 1/8 inches) Much shorter that the lengths used in this antenna. So I'll skip that until tiger58 can tell us where his lengths came from. Assuming his length is good and we correspondingly reduce the length then the length to fit 2.4 GHz, which is a reduction by 0.64m to 0.13m or 0.203 we reduce 3.2m by that or (3.2 * 0.203 = 0.65m - which is pretty much right on for a full wavelength at 2.4 GHz as seen above anyway.) So shrink the images so that the over all length of each half piece of wire comes to 0.325m or 1.07' or 12.8" Again, if you make it flat it will be very directional so in this case, depending on where you're putting the antenna, you may want it flat if it is in one corner of the house or in a tube if it is centrally located. tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLMar 27, 2013. 6:03 AMReply Hey Phil, thanks for the great comments. To answer the question about where my numbers came from requires a kind of long story. As I have said in another reply, the antenna evolved rather than being designed, and since that story has been told in another reply, I'll not repeat it here. Part of my reason for posting the instructable was the hope that it would engender discussions like this one, and that the instructable could be a starting place for someone living out in a fringe reception area to come up with a better design. And I also had some hopes that people could find that the use of a practically free over the air TV antenna and an $8.00 per month subscription to Netflix is a great alternative to a $127.00 per month satellite or cable bill. PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 27, 2013. 8:56 AMReply Hi Bill, I understand. As for fringe area reception you're correct in saying it will need to be tested. In my area the antenna is about the same as a simple bowtie antenna. I designed a simple single element turnstile bowtie which would have about matched this one for 360 degree reception as well as about the same signal levels. I was not able to measure anything substantially better with the fractal antenna.

The way I've seen them designed is that the fractal pattern uses up a full wavelength of wire to make a smaller full-wave loop antenna. Your's is different in that it is more of a dipole design with each leg of the dipole being folded but NOT connecting to anything else. tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLMar 27, 2013. 2:51 PMReply Yeah, I started out using full-wave loops within loops, e.g. longer loops with more iterations of fractal pattern for lower frequency channels surrounding shorter loops for the higher frequencies. When I started testing the loops individually in an attempt to determine which loop was having the greatest effect on the reception, I discovered that the middle loop was performing well enough on both the VHF and UHF channels to make the outer and inner loops superfluous. Eliminating those two loops also made building the antenna much easier. Running out of wire in the middle of building yet another version of the antenna, combined with curiosity about how a dipole would work lead to the current design, with the larger "peaks" in the middle of the patterns being added as a later attempt to improve reception of Low Band VHF signals. So, that's the whole story in a nut shell. One person I would really like to hear from on all this is a ham that would be brave enough to connect the antenna, or a version of it, to 2-meter and 70-cm rigs and see what kind of SWR they get. :-) Thanks again for the fine comments and discussion. 73, Bill - KG0XF PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 29, 2013. 3:21 AMReply What are the frequencies/channels of the VHF stations in your area? In mine, Baltimore Ch 11 & 13, Washington DC: Ch 7 & 9. I doubt any station is much below Ch 7 any more UHF is better for DTV so they may have stayed on the UHF channels as did our Ch 2 from Baltimore (now on Ch 38, 614 - 620 MHz) and Ch 4 from Washington is now Ch 48, 674 - 680 MHz. But many of the upper VHF stations simply kept their original channels & frequencies. tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLMar 29, 2013. 5:55 AMReply Here in the Denver area we're in a TV signal friendly environment. We have channels 2.1, 2.2, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, 9.1, 9.2, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3 &, 14.1 in the VHF bands. PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 29, 2013. 1:34 PMReply Your channel 2 is NOT on channel 2 any longer that I am pretty sure of. To find out let's look at TVFool.com for Denver CO ? 80205? It says: Name Ch Real Ch 2 KWGN-TV 34 UHF 4 KCNC-DT 35 UHF 6 KXDP-LP 6 VHF 7 7 VHF 9 9 VHF 10 Not listed 12 KBDI-TV 13 VHF 14 KTFD-TV 15 (14 is the low end of UHF) Pretty much like my area in that 2 & 4 were moved to the UHF spectrum & everyone at 6 and above pretty much stayed in their original VHF channel, except for your CH 12 which moved to 13. Your Ch 14 was in the UHF & moved to 15 in the UHF section. Try your zip code to see what it says your should be able to receive. tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLMar 29, 2013. 2:38 PMReply Thanks for all the good information. I had no idea that the actual frequencies of the Low Band VHF channels had changed. Maybe that is why the website was named TVFool. :-) Channel 10 is pretty new, and 10.4 just shows a test pattern all the time. I visited TVFool briefly, didn't see a place to enter my zip, but will get back to it and spend some time there. Thanks again.

PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Aug 8, 2013. 4:25 AMReply Yes, they had it nice and clear when I started using their site and then the "improved" it so that it's more difficult to find where to enter your zip code and/or address. A street address with the zip code does give more specific results. When you first go to www.TVFool.com find the words, "Check Your Address for Free TV" and click on them. they link to another page, there look for the words/link: ">> Click HERE <<" and click on that, that takes you to the page where you can enter your information and click on what you are entering, they now take GPS coordinates! - Now click on the button labeled, "Find Local Channels" (Why anyone would want to find NOT local channels is beyond me, except for people like me who know about this site, and other sites, which give this info so I can help someone somewhere else look up their channels. philip42 in reply to tigers58Jul 30, 2013. 3:06 PMReply Changing actual frequencies was a necessity because of the transition period. For several months stations continued to transmit their old analog signals on their "actual" frequencies and the new digital channels on the reassigned frequencies. Obviously during the transition period there would be no way to transmit NTSC analog and ATSC digital using the same frequencies. In theory after the transition was completed a station could then transmit digital signals on the old analog frequency, but that would require everybody to rescan their digital tuners to save the corrected channels. It's much easier to use aliases where the old channel numbers everybody's familiar with are used even though they have no connection to the actual transmitting frequency. PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 30, 2013. 7:59 AMReply It used to be the first thing you clicked on now it's three clicks deep. http://tvfool.com Click on: Check Your Address for Free TV Then click: "Click HERE" below "Check Your Address for Free TV " Then scroll down until you see the place to enter your address & zip. For best results enter your street address, city/town, state & 5 digit zip. They don't use zip+4 yet. The direct link is: http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29 tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLMar 30, 2013. 8:14 AMReply I went back after leaving my reply to you and found the place to enter my address with ZIP. I played around with it for an hour or so, clicking on the icon next to stations and checking out the satellite views showing the coverage areas - really a great tool. Thanks again. PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 30, 2013. 11:35 AMReply You are welcome. There is a similar tool which is much more pessimistic in its evaluation of stations you will be able to receive & it also limits the height to 30 and 60 feet. http://www.antennaweb.org/Address.aspx PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 29, 2013. 3:04 AMReply Will if I have time I'll put it up on my MFJ Antenna analyzer. I can at least test out SWR & impedance for 2 meters & SWR for 440. However in all probability this is horizontally polarized, for TV reception it should be, so it wouldn't be good for FM on either band but possibly for the low power stuff which is mostly horizontal it might work out.

tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLMar 29, 2013. 5:32 AMReply Yes, you're right on the polarization and all. I've been asked and have no way to test it myself just curious. PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Mar 30, 2013. 8:49 AMReply OK here's what I found. The antenna was tested in my basement window and I could not find the clip on cores to reduce RF on the outside of the shield so these are probably not the best readings possible. Fractal antenna with 8 feet of 50 Ohm coax to the MFJ analyzer. | TV | Freq | - - | - - | | Ch | MHz | SWR | Ohms | +----+------+-----+------+ | -2 | - 54 | inf |- 20 -| | -2 | - 56 | inf |- 50 -| +----+------+-----+------+ | -6 | - 82 || -6 | - 88 |+----+------+-----+------+ | -6 | - 82 || -6 | - 88 |+----+------+-----+------+ | ~7 |- 173 |+----+------+-----+------+ | -- |- 167 |~4:1 |- 60 -| +----+------+-----+------+ | -- |- 138 | 3:1 |- 20 -| +----+------+-----+------+ | -- |- 140 |1-5:1|- 70 -| +----+------+-----+------+ | -- |- 142 | 3:1 |- 45 -| +----+------+-----+------+ | -- |- 415 |2-7:1| - - -| +----+------+-----+------+ | -- |- 440 |2-2:1| - - -| +----+------+-----+------+ | -- |- 470 | >5:1| - - -| +----+------+-----+------+ 54 - 71 MHz, SWR: > 3:1 Ohms: 20 - 400 71 - 117 MHz, SWR: > 3:1 Ohms: 05 - 400+ 117 - 173 MHz, SWR <> 3:1 Ohms: 05 - 400+ 415 - 470 MHz, SWR <> 3:1 Ohms: X 73 de ke3fl Phil

pajsipe says: Aug 1, 2013. 1:53 PMReply Have you tried putting a cylindrical tube (from tissue roll or paper towel roll) wrapped in aluminum foil in the middle to act as a reflector? I wonder if that would increase the strength of the signal(s)? tigers58 (author) in reply to pajsipeAug 3, 2013. 8:15 AMReply Yes, I've tried 3 different sized tubes wrapped in foil - a paper towel tube, a mailing tube, and empty aluminum beer cans. I taped an antenna to a window frame to insure that the orientation of the antenna didn't change, stepped through all of the channels I receive here and recorded the signal strength for each channel. Then for each of the aforementioned "reflectors," I placed the reflector in the middle of the antenna, stepped through all the channels and recorded the signal strength.

I found that for each of the reflectors the signal level would improve for some channels, the signal level would remain the same for some of the channels, and the signal level would be reduced for some channels, with the signal level for a couple of channels being reduced to zero. The channels with improved signal levels, and the channels with reduced levels were not the same channels for each reflector. For the channels in this area, the best over all performance was with no reflector, but in a different area with different channel frequencies, it's possible the the overall performance could be improved by using a reflector in the middle of the antenna. philip42 says: Jul 30, 2013. 2:29 PMReply Can you make a version of the PDF which is a single document? I've got access to a 11 x 17 laser printer so it'd be great to print this directly on to poster board cut to fit into the printer. tigers58 (author) in reply to philip42Jul 31, 2013. 5:10 AMReply I just uploaded a PDF file containing the pattern in one long piece. This file was added to the first step of the instructable. I hope this works for you. DonMemo says: Jul 11, 2013. 9:40 AMReply Hi! I tried your antenna design and tested it in Charlotte, NC. According to antennaWeb.org I should get 13 channels (zip code 28217). After hitting the "search" option on the TV, it only recognized the channels 18.1 WCCB-DT, 18.2 WCCB-ST, 9.1 WSOC-DT & 9.2 WSOC-WX, the rest were not detected. I live in an apartment complex (first floor) and I use the antenna indoors, so I assume some interference is blocking the signals (last building of the complex, plus green area with woods next to it). The cell phone signal is awful at my apartment, but on the parking lot I can receive full cell phone signal. Two months ago I got the "RCA ANT1050 Digital Flat Passive Ultra-Slim-Profile Antenna with Enhanced Reception-Black" from Wal-Mart (Around $10) and I received just two more channels with it (46.1 WJZY-DT & 3.1 WBTV-DT). I returned it to the store because the channels were not constant all the time (I could watch around 2 minutes and the signal is scrambled for a few seconds). So I think I need to move out from here in order to get better OTA signals :s PhilKE3FL in reply to DonMemoJul 31, 2013. 4:32 AMReply DonMemo, In Antenna work just as in real estate it is all about location. I'll give you an example, I built this antenna but the example was done with my quad element turnstile bowtie (QETB) design. In the Spring and Summer the antennas in the attic no longer are able to receive stations from Washington D.C. to my south, Baltimore still comes in fine, to my east. I used my QETB antenna in the attic and an amplifier, no help, then I noticed I still had a single element simple UHF bowtie antenna in the garage still on a stick. I used this antenna for watching (really listening) TV when working in the garage. As a lark I gave that simple antenna a try & it worked fine getting the Washington stations. It could only get either Washington or Baltimore but not both at the same time. I replaced it with the QETB antenna & was then able to get both Washington and Baltimore stations. This antenna is still in use, in the garage, and it is now year #3, I had to add an amplifier last year. The difference? Location! The antenna is lower than those in the attic by about 10 feet and it is further to the east by about 20 ft. But, this garage antenna is going through at least three walls & whatever junk is in the shed to the south of the garage. Bottom line: Location, location, location! Just like real estate. Try different locations in your apartment and if you have a portable TV try it outside as well. But yes, you may have to move to get a better shot at the TV stations. Good-luck! ronshire says: Jul 28, 2013. 3:08 PMReply

I'm curious to know what TV & converter box you are using? Ron N8APZ PhilKE3FL in reply to DonMemoJul 31, 2013. 4:32 AMReply DonMemo, In Antenna work just as in real estate it is all about location. I'll give you an example, I built this antenna but the example was done with my quad element turnstile bowtie (QETB) design. In the Spring and Summer the antennas in the attic no longer are able to receive stations from Washington D.C. to my south, Baltimore still comes in fine, to my east. I used my QETB antenna in the attic and an amplifier, no help, then I noticed I still had a single element simple UHF bowtie antenna in the garage still on a stick. I used this antenna for watching (really listening) TV when working in the garage. As a lark I gave that simple antenna a try & it worked fine getting the Washington stations. It could only get either Washington or Baltimore but not both at the same time. I replaced it with the QETB antenna & was then able to get both Washington and Baltimore stations. This antenna is still in use, in the garage, and it is now year #3, I had to add an amplifier last year. The difference? Location! The antenna is lower than those in the attic by about 10 feet and it is further to the east by about 20 ft. But, this garage antenna is going through at least three walls & whatever junk is in the shed to the south of the garage. Bottom line: Location, location, location! Just like real estate. Try different locations in your apartment and if you have a portable TV try it outside as well. But yes, you may have to move to get a better shot at the TV stations. Good-luck! ronshire says: Jul 28, 2013. 3:08 PMReply I'm curious to know what TV & converter box you are using? Ron N8APZ tigers58 (author) in reply to ronshireJul 29, 2013. 5:08 AMReply Thanks for you comments - some good ideas there. I'm using a Phillips TV that doesn't need a converter box. ronshire says: Jul 28, 2013. 3:06 PMReply what a nice project you have put together! maybe someone would like to experiment with this design using litz wire. it too is small in dimensions and offers more surface signal capture area. i know it works superior when winding AM band antennas on ferrite cores. telephone or thermostat wire may be a cheaper substitute for the bare copper wire if one doesn't want the decorative outcome of your design! i am thinking of building your antenna but using 2 or possibly 4 of the iterations of your design & tie them together similar to the DB4 & DB8 antennas. Ron N8APZ swander says: Jul 11, 2013. 10:41 AMReplyCorrection, 2.1 is actually RF channel 43. I will post results from old 12 element roof antenna next. swander says: Jul 11, 2013. 9:48 AMReply I built this antenna last night using copper windings from a old transformer, probably about 22G wire. Followed the instructions and found it doesnt quite fit in a cd bin, but close. You have to sort of fold itself over a little more than the slots allow. Also i compared it to my GE set top antenna Composed of 2 1m whip antennas, a directional loop Antenna and a tuning knob. I pulled 72 digital channels from the GE antenna and 62 from the fractal antenna. The fractal antenna oddly didnt pull any channels under 13 with the exception of 2.1 which is technically the hardest channel to transmit as It has the lowest frequency. 2.1 came in clear with just me

touching the coaxial cable i was using for the project! It is much smaller than the GE antenna, but the performance is not as good in my area, my main transmitting towers are about 100km away in Los Angeles. Direct line of sight on a clear day. SaurIMX in reply to tigers58Jul 10, 2013. 12:42 PMReply Okay, but what is the reason? gpoi says: Jun 22, 2013. 2:46 PMReply After trying different setups, I'm currently using this fractal in my 2nd floor living room with an RCA antenna in the attic and using a coax switch to select between the 2. my RCA will not pull in 56 and 62 very well and the fractal will not pull in 2, so it works out. I tried to hook up both in the attic but found out that hooking up 2 antennas directly is a tricky proposition. my printer printed out the pattern a bit bigger than it should have been. I can live with this setup just fine :) gpoi in reply to gpoiJun 23, 2013. 10:08 AMReply if I get tired of the switch, I will put it back into the attic and use a winegard SD3700 signal combiner to hook the 2 antennas together using equal length wires to combiner. tigers58 (author) in reply to gpoiJun 24, 2013. 8:35 AMReply Thanks again for your posts. Your experiments add valuable information as to the bandwidth of the antenna. I'm curious about how you tried to tie the two antennas together, and info about the distance to TV stations in your area. In commercial yagi type antennas the polarity of the large VHF portion of the antenna seems to be always be made opposite that of the smaller UHF portions by crossing the connecting wires between the two. I'm thinking that there should be a way to hook the two together in your attic and do away with the antenna switch. Did you try connecting the antennas together before connecting them to coax? Your saying that you can live with the setup really struck a cord with me. I had tried so many different versions of the fractal antenna that I was developing callouses on my finger tips like a guitar player, and when the current version worked so well for me, I lost all interest in trying different configurations. I was very excited try 3, this as my first instructable. We recently pulled the plug on cable. I went medusa1066 says:to Jun 2013. 9:49 AMReply with the direct coax method, but my TV's did not find any channels (zip 26501). I am going to try a better piece of coax as the one I used was in poor condition. My copperwork is a little sloppy in the pattern also. My question is, would minor deviations from following the pattern make the antenna completely useless? What are the critical parameters of the design to work? tigers58 (author) in reply to medusa1066Jun 4, 2013. 4:38 AMReply I went to the web antenna website, http://www.antennaweb.org/Address.aspx, entered your zip code and the site reported that due to the terrain, available stations, etc. you should only be able to receive 2 channels from 1 TV station at that zip. I would guess that the problem is not caused by minor deviations in the pattern of the antenna, but is just a result of not having a whole lot of stations that can be received at your location. UHF TV signals travel in straight lines, and if there are mountains between the receiving antenna and the station, the signals can't reach the antenna. I lived back in the mountains of Colorado for a number of years and had a big ole C-band satellite dish antenna beside my house because there was no cable and no way to receive an over-the-air TV signal there. Sometimes you just have to go with cable or satellite if you want to watch TV. :-( If any of your neighbors have outdoor antennas, check with them and see how many stations they are picking up before investing money in new coax. bobalbury says: May 6, 2013. 9:00 PMReply Outstanding. Simple, elegant, functional. tigers58 (author) in reply to bobalburyMay 7, 2013. 5:00 AMReply Thank you for your comment. igusdude says: Apr 24, 2013. 3:39 PMReply

I built it!!! Works great! I live in the hills, so my coverage is not very good. Our second story TV gets a nice signal, but the downstairs was marginal at best. I had an amplified antenna downstairs, but it was very finnicky! I built your fractal design, connected it directly to the TV using Coax cable, and bingo! 160+ channels. No rotating, no adjusting! I did have to find a sweet spot near the TV that worked best, but now its trouble free and a pleasure to watch TV again. Thanks!!! tigers58 (author) in reply to igusdudeApr 24, 2013. 5:43 PMReply Thanks for your report! I love to hear results like this from people that have built the antenna, and I'm glad that it worked so well for you. zappenfusen says: Feb 21, 2013. 7:30 AMReply Tiger, Would increasing length help anything? I'm receiving 3.1, 22.1, 28.1, etc. I get no 3 or 11 or 6, etc. if you understand where I'm going. I'm considering a larger diameter perhaps doubling your drawing. I know nothing of antenna & the involved VooDoo. Am I wasting time or do you have any thoughts on this. I'm thinking large bleach bottle on a stick. Zapp tigers58 (author) in reply to zappenfusenFeb 21, 2013. 8:17 AMReply Yes, increasing the diameter may help. First try just straightening the pattern (unrolling the cylinder) and putting it in a position so that it is broadside to the broadcast tower(s). That should give you an idea as to whether or not increasing the length of the pattern and diameter will help. If that doesn't improve anything, then your location may be on the fringe of the range for the antenna. I am hoping to get reports from people that have built the antenna as to how it is performing vs. the distance to the TV towers. I have very little of that kind of info now. zappenfusen in reply to tigers58Apr 18, 2013. 3:00 PMReply tigers58, Zapps 59 & is sorry about slow thanks. I've gotten as far as lengthening mount (2 large bleach bottles modified accordingly) and transferred pattern doubling length. Upon receiving your reply affirming it may work I'll complete experiment out of success of 1st project. It's weird as I receive all on air channels except 11 which locally is strongest signal. I'll admit I didn't try 1st fractal outdoors as I constructed it from file folders. The plastic bleach bottles I will mount on broomstick handle on chimney! Thanks again for reply. Walt Arnsdorff AKA Zappenfusen tigers58 (author) in reply to zappenfusenApr 19, 2013. 6:24 AMReply Thanks for the update. I don't have any idea about why you wouldn't be receiving channel 11.

dexterp says: Apr 11, 2013. 7:04 AMReply Hi tiger58 ! I've been checking many DTV antennas, and this one is really cool ! But i'm wondering ? What if I printed your pattern exactly 200% bigger ? Would it give it more coverage, while keeping the exact same properties, or would it de-tune it from the VHF-UHF band ? BTW : What is the resonant frequency of this antenna ? I was also wondering that : if you put another tube inside , reflective this time it kinda make it semi-directionnal. but in all directions ?

... or is it the purpose of this model, to be pass-through ? So many question ... ;-) Thanks for this amazing design. I figured that : if I could make it just big enough, it could also serve as a lamp shade ;-) Hehe ! If you use fine wire, and decorate it with pictures, they would be illuminated from the inside ;-) Cheers ! tigers58 (author) in reply to dexterpApr 11, 2013. 3:17 PMReply Thanks for your comment - you have some interesting questions and thoughts there. As to what would be the result of making the antenna larger, or inserting a reflective material inside it, all I can say is I don't know what would happen in either case. All I can suggest is to build one using the pattern as is, and then build one using a pattern that you have blown up and compare the performance of the two. I've always pictured signals passing through the antenna and being received on both sides, and my experiments with using a reflector off to one side of the antenna were inconclusive, as it didn't make much difference. Maybe rolling some aluminum foil around the cardboard tube from a roll of paper towels and inserting it into the middle of the antenna would be a simple way of testing your "inside reflector" idea. The lampshade idea is interesting. Maybe you've hit on something there. :-) Sounds like a fun project to try. Perhaps a pole lamp design made from PVC pipe with the antenna at the top so that it is above the heads of people walking around the room. Maybe thicker wire with different colors between the wires so that it looks kinda like a Tiffany Lamp? The resonant frequency of the antenna? I started calling the antenna "magic" due to it's seeming very wide bandwidth, so I don't know if "resonant frequency" is even a good way to think about it. I don't have an RF sweep generator nor any way of determining the resonant frequency of the antenna. I would be interested in the results of any testing of your ideas that you may do. JennaFair says: Apr 2, 2013. 12:07 PMReply Printed it out last week, and just got around to making it last night. Used old copper wire my DD unwound from a dead box fan motor. It was kinked and bent, but free and on hand. We went from 5 channels to 18 out of the 21 channels antennaweb says we should pick up, that's with it inside and <30 feet off the ground. Phenomenal. Thanks. Need to work on mounting it outside above my roof over the summer. tigers58 (author) in reply to JennaFairApr 2, 2013. 6:13 PMReply Thank you so much for your comment. That is the kind I love to see. After writing that wire from an electric motor could be used, I'm glad to see that someone actually used it - and that it works so well! :-) epadget says: Mar 26, 2013. 7:33 AMReply I wanted to let everyone know of a 'new' use for this instructable (I read through the comments, didn't see anyone say this). I have a dual receiver through Dish Network. One remote works on IR, the other works on UHF. The problem is, the UHF can be easily interfered with. Even the equipment around and hooked up to the Dish receiver can interfere. One solution is to extend the antenna in the back of the receiver using a short piece of coax. This did not work for me. What did work for me is hooking up this Fractal Magic antenna! Works beautifully as a matter of fact!

Thanks again for this post. It was fun to make and very useful! Eric tigers58 (author) in reply to epadgetMar 26, 2013. 8:50 AMReply Wow - Thanks for posting this comment Eric! beaudean27 says: Mar 20, 2013. 1:09 PMReply I have tried a few fractal antennas and decided to try your design. I used a large Quaker Oatmeal container and some very thin copper wire from an old toy car motor. After much frustration and broken wire I had to cut the container and unroll it to get it wired without breaking it. Finally after 2 hours and lots of patience, it was complete. I hooked it up and got about 5 clear locals downstairs and wasnt really happy with that so I hooked it up to my tv upstairs and got 13 channels perfectly clear. So, after all of that, here is my question..... What do you think would happen if I oversized the design. example..... I am currently using an oatmeal container.... what would happen if I used a 55 gallon plastic barrel and wired many iterations of small fractal designs just like you did but on a GRAND scale? Anschutz says: Mar 17, 2013. 4:28 PMReply Well it's been up on the roof for 24 hours and continues to work flawlessly. I see my description of "parallel" was not very clear. I tried to describe using terminology I'm familiar with (parallel vs series). I debated about how to wire the two and essentially flipped a coin. Hopefully the attached image better describes how they are wired. In opting to go with two antennas I was hoping to improve reception and ensure the blind spot was minimized. In my neck of the woods broadcasts originate from transmitters orientated throughout a ~180 degree arc (in relation to my home). Rather than build for complete omnidirection capability, I offset seams to ensure good coverage where I thought I needed most. I also offset the fractal design by 'half a flake' thinking it would help. When I installed the antenna it was -20C (-4F) with a significant wind. I simply mounted the antenna as quickly as I could before freezing! Perhaps later in the spring I'll try tuning (i.e. turning) to see if reception can be improved even further. If you do make a dual (or more) arrangement please post what you did and how it effects performance.

tigers58 (author) in reply to AnschutzMar 17, 2013. 5:35 PMReply Yes, the diagram helps a lot. Thanks for the reply. I would call the arrangement you used a "stacked array," but that is just my way of saying it, and I don't know what words would be used by an expert. :-) I really like that you have achieved such a good increase in performance without spreading out the antenna and adding reflectors. Great job!

Anschutz says: Mar 16, 2013. 3:53 PMReply Here are some pictures of my completed antenna. I ended up creating two and wiring together in parallel. I used epoxy, silicone and a couple machine screws to hold it all together. For UV protection the completed project was scuffed with 220 grit sandpaper, primed and painted with hammertone paint. The antenna is mounted on two 1.5" x 48" fiberglass tent poles. Tent poles were sourced from a local tool/surplus store (Princess Auto) for $1.99 each. Antenna/pole is secured to the roof using an old satellite mount and is approx 30' above ground. The two antennas wired in parallel effectively doubled the signal strength reported by my TV. Prior to installing on the roof, I was getting partial signal indoors (3 to 4 bars) and 2 channels only. With it on the roof my Samsung TV reports full signal (10 bars) on all channels available (7). Amazing antenna considering it cost me less than $15 (including pole, mount and paint). I'm really looking forward to the questions I'm sure my neighbors will be asking this spring, and can't wait to connect to my media center PC. Thanks for the great design and inspiring me to take a step towards cutting the cord with my satellite provider!

tigers58 (author) in reply to AnschutzMar 17, 2013. 6:23 AMReply I LOVE IT! Thanks for the pictures, construction details and signal report. Great job! It will be interesting to hear what the neighbors say. My next door neighbor can't believe that the single fractal antenna I have sticking up in the air is a TV antenna. He thinks it is way too small to be a TV antenna. When stacking the antennas, did you orient the two (in regard to the gap between the ends) in the same direction, i.e on the same side above one another? Also, did you keep the two antennas "in phase" or twist the lead-in between the two? I don't think that would make much difference, but I'm curious. So far all of my experimenting had been done with a single antenna, so I'm really wondering if your tandem arrangement there could be the answer to the "directionality" of the antenna. What I'm thinking is that by having the start and end of the top wire 180 degrees from the start and end of the bottom wire might make the antenna truly omnidirectional. And your ideas of using the thin plastic for the form, thus eliminating the possibility of moisture making the posterboard more conductive and adversely affecting the antenna performance, and stacking the antennas are really genius. Thanks for sharing.

mabo says: Mar 14, 2013. 11:40 AMReply hi, does the gauge of the wire matter much? could thin single strand be say twisted and doubled for effective increased gauge? thanks. tigers58 (author) in reply to maboMar 14, 2013. 5:46 PMReply It stands to reason that the larger the wire in the antenna, the more signal will get to the TV. I can't say how much difference the gauge makes, but I am guess that is could make a big difference. One fellow left comments saying that he had used an electric drill to twist together three 28-gauge wires that he used to build the antenna, and he said it worked well. So, Yes a single strand can be doubled or tripled and twisted to form an effective increased gauge. Thanks for the excellent question. theerikjohnson says: Mar 13, 2013. 2:24 PMReply I made one by tracing the pattern (slightly scaled down) on an empty 2 liter soda bottle. I then threaded speaker wire with a curved upholstery needle. works great in the attic and I hope to try it outside, above the roof. Keep up the good work. tigers58 (author) in reply to theerikjohnsonMar 13, 2013. 6:11 PMReply OK on the upholstery needle - good thinking. While looking for some way to put the antenna outside, and before noticing the 100-count CD case sitting next to the computer, I made a "taller" one with a smaller diameter that I put inside a 2-liter Pepsi bottle. I did it by cutting off the bottom of the bottle, inserting the antenna, taping the bottom back on the bottle with vinyl electricians tape, and passing the lead-in out through the bottle mouth. Not a very elegant design, and I never put it outside since the electricians tape surely wouldn't have lasted long in the weather. I like yours much better, and since you used the plastic of the bottle for the antenna form, you don't have to worry about rain and snow getting into the container and ruining the antenna. Nice! Thanks for the comment. theerikjohnson says: Mar 13, 2013. 2:24 PMReply I made one by tracing the pattern (slightly scaled down) on an empty 2 liter soda bottle. I then threaded speaker wire with a curved upholstery needle. works great in the attic and I hope to try it outside, above the roof. Keep up the good work. zimitt says: Mar 12, 2013. 7:33 PMReply Thanks so much for this great instructable. I just tested out my finished product. I made a slight mod because I wanted to use it in my VW camper. I wanted something weatherproof and able to lay flat for storage. Your plan seemed perfect. I substituted a plastic placemat for the cardboard. Exactly the right length without the need to joint. My test was between this antenna and the classic bowtie design. Since all my stations come from the same direction, I left it flat. Simply took down my bowtie and hung this one. The bowtie did slightly better. Out of the 6 OTA stations I receive, 5 come in at 100% on both. One station came in 88% on the bowtie and 20-40% with this antenna. I'm extremely happy with this project and cant wait to try it out camping. It solves the problem of rescanning from different directions when I don't know where the stations are located.

tigers58 (author) in reply to X86-1138Mar 8, 2013. 3:12 PMReply My oldest daughter was here for a visit a while ago, and she suggested finding a clear material for the antenna form. She said she liked the way the copper wires looked against the white poster board, and thought using a clear form would give it the look of modern art. Thanks for the comment, and good luck with your build. Anschutz says: Mar 8, 2013. 7:39 AMReply After building this antenna as per instructions, I have come up with a mod that uses plastic for the inner cylinder instead. After looking at a local craft store I ended up finding suitable plastic at a local Dollar Store. In the kitchen section were kids plastic place-mats (approx 1 mm thick; $1 each). I cut the place-mat using the template and drilled out the holes using a electric drill with a very small bit. I opted to go with three strands of twisted 28 gauge wire instead. Antenna performance appears to be about the same, although now the build is much more solid. Using plastic also enabled tighter straighter runs of wire throughout the fractal shape with sharper corners. I think the plastic place-mat will hold up much better to the elements considering it is dishwasher safe. The other mod I made was relocating the coax connection to the bottom of the DVD case. When mounted, I can rotate the antenna with no possibility of disrupting the inner cylinder/wiring. I intend to seal the case with silicone, scuff it up with sandpaper, and paint with UV protective paint. I'm hoping to get it up on the roof this weekend depending on the weather. Once installed it will be about 30' - 35' above ground. I'll post performance numbers as soon as I can. Pictures are of the original card-stock build, place-mats and the new build.

Anschutz says: Mar 5, 2013. 5:34 AMReply I built this antenna in about an hour this evening. I hooked it up to my samsung and was frankly blown away by the picture quality. HD is much better than what I get with my Shaw HD PVR. Only difference with my build was 4 twisted strands of 28 g copper wire. Cut the strands into 12 ft lengths. Tied one end to my workbench. Inserted the other into the chuck of my electric drill.

This worked great to create a single strand with very uniform twist. I also exited the coax out the bottom as I intend to mount on my roof using an old satellite dish mount. Tomorrow I'm going to stop by a craft store and see if I can pick up a sheet of flexible plastic. I think making the inner cylinder out of plastic will hold up better to the elements. It should also allow me to get the copper strands straighter/tighter. If possible it would be great if you could post your CAD file. Thank you very much for creating this instructable! tigers58 (author) in reply to AnschutzMar 5, 2013. 5:39 PMReply Thank you for your comment, and it's a very interesting one. I'm pleased to hear that it is working so well for you. I'm hoping that you post another comment on using the flexible, and if it works well, I'd like to know the details as to what kind of plastic sheet you used, how thick and cost, etc. osterac says: Feb 27, 2013. 1:22 PMReply I have been back in my attic and have done more tests. I removed the matching transformer from the antenna and it seems to have helped. After a lot of tweaking, rotating the antenna to different angles and such, I was able to get a strong signal from my local ABC station which is 73 miles away. I got a weaker signal from my PBS station which is i the same place, but is on a different frequency; but the signal was too weak to pull in and watch. I had the antenna standing up with the "gap" pointed slightly, maybe 10 degrees, to one side of the station. The amp I have seemed to make it easier to find the stations and pull in the signals when I was using it. I ended up with 12 stations, the bunny ears I usually use get 14, although 1 of those 12 is one the bunny ears don't get; however it happens to be a Spanish channel. I decided, since the bunny ears seem to work pretty well without the amp, I would put the amp and the fractal antenna downstairs where I don't have wiring from my attic antenna. Oddly, I was able to get PBS but not ABC on the downstairs TV, along with all the other stations. I found also that the antenna seems to work when turned on its' side and with its opening pointed towards the transmitter, and it also seems to work on its' side and with the edge perpendicular to the transmitter. Rotation of the antenna (rolling the antenna) seems to matter in all cases, maybe not as much when the antenna is pointed with its' opening towards the transmitter though. So it seems that this antenna has some pretty respectable range, I think if it was placed outdoors it would do even better. tigers58 (author) in reply to osteracFeb 27, 2013. 3:43 PMReply Hey Osterac, Thanks you very much for all the time and effort you have put into testing the antenna! And thank you for the detailed reports, not only for the distance and locations of the antenna that you tried, but also the configurations and orientations of the antenna - a very thorough test. 73 miles is a significant distance, and at that distance, the physical size of the antenna has got to be a major performance factor. It is good to know that the amp did make a positive difference. Is the amp a home brew, or one that you purchased? Placing the antenna outdoors made a big difference in the signal strength and in the number of channels received here. However, I live in a mobile home, and I don't know how to weigh the difference between putting the antenna outside of an aluminum box and putting it outside a wood frame house. :-) Thanks so much for the great job. osterac in reply to tigers58Feb 27, 2013. 5:38 PMReply I use a radioshack 25dB amp. See here: http://www.radioshack.com/graphics/uc/rsk/Support/ProductManuals/1501113_PM_EN.pdf It's an older one, wall mountable and housed in a big sturdy metal case. Unfortunately I don't have any coax cables long enough to reach outside, nor do I have any portable TV sets so outdoor testing would be difficult.

tigers58 (author) in reply to osteracFeb 28, 2013. 7:48 AMReply Thanks again for the update on the TV amp. I have, or had(?), a circuit around here somewhere for a DIY TV amp, but living within 35 miles of so many stations, I never got around to building it. I think what you have shown by all the experimenting you have done is that the optimal range for the Fractal Magic antenna is less than 70 miles, and I think that is pretty good for such a small antenna. Words can't express my gratitude for all the time and effort you have expended testing the antenna - thanks again. charlessenf-gm says: Feb 23, 2013. 12:07 PMReply Excellent on all counts! Thank you for sharing what may well become a commercial item. They sell various types of plastic sheet. I imagine that, if you could transfer the pattern at full-size to such a flexible plastic sheet with some spray adhesive, you could punch out all the holes (small steel leather hole-punch mounted in a drill press?) at once, wire it up; put it round a mold/block and glue the seam (or even rivet it w/plastic rivets) and have an Out Doors (roof mountable) version! Of course when the Chinese equivalent of RCA sees this they'll be able to mold the core/frame in one piece over the fractal array of copper wire - right? ;) !! tigers58 (author) in reply to charlessenf-gmFeb 23, 2013. 6:28 PMReply Thanks for your comments. Yeah, I've given some thought to ways of mass producing this thing, and I think the most fun way would be to use conductive inks and print the pattern on the back of the labels that go on Quaker Oats boxes. Of course this kind of thinking harkens back to the days when cereal boxes had prizes in them and syrup came packaged in little metal log cabins. :-) charlessenf-gm in reply to tigers58Feb 26, 2013. 9:35 AMReply Thought to pass this on to you just in case you were interested in taking the 'next step.' It would appear that your printed template could be turned into a photo resist mask or even a template for one of those new modeling printers if they have a conductive "ink" available. 2b. Re: Flexible photo-resit board? Posted by: "John Popelish" jpopelish@gmail.com jpopelish Date: Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:21 am ((PST)) On 02/23/2013 06:08 PM, Gooey wrote: > Reading an interesting INSTRUCTABLE on Fractal Antenna > for Digital TV in which the author used wire threaded > through a Fractal Maze printed on a sheet of 'poster > board," I got to thinking first of a thin sheet of > plastic, then of a circuit board that was flexible enough > after etching to allow it to be rolled into a circular > form with a five-inch +/- diameter and thought to ask > here if there was such a thing for 'home use,' ad, if so > if anyone knew where to buy the stuff. > > see: "Fractal Magic DIY HDTV Antenna by tigers58 on > January 2, 2013" They make copper clad PCB fiber glass material as thin as a file card. Easily flexible enough to roll into a 5 inch diameter tube. If you want more flexible than that, there is clad kapton (polyamide) film. You should probably tape either to a sheet of rigid plastic to etch.

for example: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Flexible-pcb-sheet-polyimide-kapton-copper-clad-laminate-Pyralux-1-pc12-x-9-/181087897575 http://www.ebay.com/itm/10-New-PRINTED-CIRCUIT-BOARD-12-x9-in-COPPER-CLAD-018/160839524037 -Regards, John Popelish tigers58 (author) in reply to charlessenf-gmFeb 26, 2013. 11:46 AMReply Thank you again for your fine comments and for these links, they look particularly good. This morning I just finished registering company name and trademark with the Colorado Secretary of State and will be offering kits for building the antenna as a first product. I kept thinking that mass production of the antenna would have to be a printed process, since I didn't know that there were such thin copper clad materials that could be etched as those described in this e-mail. derfynole says: Feb 24, 2013. 6:28 AMReply Location: Wake Forest NC Assembled mine, and placed it on top of my soon to be departed cable box. Picked up16 channels. Going to try it up in the attic next. I was wondering if you have an opinion on using a booster or not. tigers58 (author) in reply to derfynoleFeb 24, 2013. 9:45 AMReply Thanks for the report that included location and number of channels. I'm glad to hear that the antenna is working so well for you. The antenna web website says that you should only receive 3 over the air stations at your location, but I have long suspected that their data is outdated. Moving it up to the attic should improve the performance. I've had one comment saying that a signal booster helped. I have no personal experience using one, but I think a signal booster couldn't hurt and is definitely worth trying. If you give it a try, I would really like to get a report on how it worked for you. xtremedum says: Feb 21, 2013. 7:41 PMReply tigers58 I know you asked for statistics on whether it works or not and how well: 16 Channels Found 8 Channels Actually Viewable (continuous feed with minimal skipping) 30 Miles Outside of Pittsburgh, PA I think that I could get better quality signal if placed higher/outside as there seems to be some interference around my room. I also used 20 gauge speaker wire (insulated) to make the antenna. Thanks for the 'ible! I'm happy with this start and will try some other placements/materials. tigers58 (author) in reply to xtremedumFeb 22, 2013. 5:43 AMReply Thanks for the report. Placement and height above ground can make a big difference in the performance of the antenna. Also, since this antenna is not truly omnidirectional, just turning it a few degrees can sometimes make a big difference. Trees, especially pine trees, between the antenna and the broadcast tower can have a big effect on the reception. zappenfusen says: Feb 21, 2013. 7:57 AMReply Would extending the fractal length help? My 1st attempt was with coax which I will repeat with twin lead after reading your answers. I'm thinking large bleach bottle on a stick with fractal pattern sized appropriately.

Diggyx17 says: Feb 20, 2013. 10:22 AMReply So when your feed the 5' 4" copper wire through the holes is there any cutting involved. tigers58 (author) in reply to Diggyx17Feb 20, 2013. 3:03 PMReply Yes, the wire is cut into pieces and threaded separately into each side of the pattern. The excess wire is trimmed from each side when the wire has been threaded through all the holes. You don't need wire cutters for cutting 22 or 24 gauge wire, household scissors will do the job just fine. slvng says: Feb 19, 2013. 6:33 AMReply Thanks for charing that Tiger58. But I have a question, when I print the template so that the height is 150mm (98%), the total width is 420mm, (400mm for the middle section plus 12mm on the right and 8 on the left). And not 400mm total. Should I fire up photoshop and squeeze the template a little? It seems that that would compromise the proportions... Thanks again. tigers58 (author) in reply to slvngFeb 19, 2013. 1:53 PMReply Yes, you're right. I just printed it out (98% on my printer and PDF reader) and checked the dimensions of the printed pattern, and it has stretched by 18mm overall while remaining 150mm wide. Something in the translation from CAD drawing to PDF has changed the dimensions a little. In order for the antenna to fit in an empty CD/DVD case, the circumference of the cyclinder needs to be close to 386mm, and this length can be adjusted by cutting the material around the tabs back so the length from the slots to the base of the tabs is about 386mm. The most important dimension is the length of the elements that make up the smaller, outside fractal "stars," and should ideally be 20mm plus or minus 1mm. On the pattern I just printed out, the length of these elements is right on at 20mm. So, check the length of the arms on the stars and if they're close to 20mm, the antenna will performed as designed. Thanks for the heads up and the good question. PhilKE3FL says: Feb 15, 2013. 3:45 AMReply Thanks for the article! I've wanted to build an fractal antenna for HF but been doing more with TV antennas. I designed a Turnstile Bowtie Four-Element vertical array which seems to have gain & receives stations from East, West, South, I haven't tried a new scan to see if I'm getting anything from the North yet but its possible. I too noticed that many antennas do well with the 300-ohm feed line and then I remove the matching transformer from the case and use wires so I can attach coax to it once close enough to the house. I've got to try this! tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLFeb 15, 2013. 5:21 AMReply Thanks for your comments. I just finished taking pictures of coax connected to an antenna made using aluminum wire, and I'm going to try to add additional optional steps to the Instructable showing how to connect the coax and then run it out the side of the CD storage box lid to provide some strain relief for the coax-to-antenna connection. (I'm new to Instructables, so I hope I can add steps to the Instructable after it has been published.) PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Feb 15, 2013. 6:56 AMReply I have no idea about Instructables, I haven't yet put together my first one for my antenna. I hope you don't mind but I mentioned your antenna in my blog at [url]http://blog.solidsignal.com/content.php[/url] I look forward to your additions. I would use twin-lead until I get into the house where I'd run the coax. In fact, my first Turnstile-Bowtie-4-Element antenna uses twin-lead right into the wall plate. I should probably change it to coax just before it comes into the house/outside wall.

tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLFeb 17, 2013. 4:45 PMReply Thanks for your comment. No, I don't mind that you mentioned my instructable in your blog, in fact I'm rather flattered that you did. Thanks again! PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Feb 18, 2013. 11:34 AMReply The blog mentioning your antenna should be up later today 2/18/13 at the URL given above http://blog.solidsignal.com/content.php - then look at the top left area (Blue title area, below is the white link area, below that is the blue link area), and my link is on this 3rd line to the far right - the last one at present. It is called, "Karras' Corner" click on that & the most current blog article should be about your antenna. tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLFeb 18, 2013. 4:31 PMReply I just checked out the job - very professional post, and a nice job. Thanks for the link and the help finding the blog. I'll be looking for your report on how the antenna works for you. 73, Bill KG0XF PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Feb 19, 2013. 2:29 AMReply Hi Bill. I started punching the holes yesterday in between getting ready for work again today & other projects. I'll ask people at work if they have any empty 100 CD spindles the one I have at home is still about 50% full. 73 de ke3fl, Phil tigers58 (author) in reply to PhilKE3FLFeb 19, 2013. 4:46 AMReply Hi Phil, When I needed another empty CD/DVD case, and the only one I had still had about 40 unused DVD's in it, I luckily discovered that the spindle in that DVD case unscrewed from the base. The part on the bottom of the spindle that unscrewed was about an inch and a half in diameter, so the unused DVD's didn't fall off the bottom, and I put the spindle and the DVD's into an empty plastic cookie "jar" with wide mouth and lid that was left over from the holidays. If the spindle of your partially used CD/DVD case unscrews, and you don't have a suitable container to put the unused CD/DVD's into, you can seal them inside a gallon size zippered plastic freezer bag to keep them from accumulating dust. As a last resort, empty 100 count CD/DVD storage boxes can be purchased on the Internet from a number of places. Mentioning "CAKE BOX" in your search for CD/DVD storage boxes speedup the process of finding the boxes you want. I hope this helps. -Bill PhilKE3FL in reply to tigers58Feb 19, 2013. 9:20 AMReply Thanks Bill I'll check that out. I've already put a call out to friends, coworkers, & family, especially my son the teacher. -Phil FOCHEESY says: Feb 18, 2013. 12:31 PMReply I started to make the antenna and could not find poster board, so I went to Aron Brothers and bought some heavy matte paper. It was really hard to poke holes with a tack, after that it was kind of hard to make a perfect circle because the paper was so thick. I eventually "trained" the papertonigh I will lace it......It it works, I will copy the template into am old DO NOT PARK plastic sign I found in my garage,It's flexible enough to make a circle and its WEATHER resistant! I will use a sodering iron to burn the holes- SIDE NOTE: I live in Los Angeles and had a horrific time finding the copper wire- I went to Home depot, lowes, osh,radio shack,hobbie stores, ect....no one had it unisulated or if they did it was 12 gauge. I actually found a spool @ a ham radio store-100 feet of 24 gauge for 3.99-so happy

tigers58 (author) in reply to FOCHEESYFeb 18, 2013. 2:46 PMReply OK, thanks for reporting back on your experiences. Yeah, that matte paper, I assume you're talking about the stuff used to make the borders around photos and works of art for framing, is way too heavy. Did you have to dip the matte into water in order to "train" it to bend into a circle? I've found the 24x28 inch sheets, and smaller sizes, of the poster board in Wal-Mart and Hobby Lobby. Once you key it into your subconscious, you start seeing this stuff everywhere. I'm in KingSooper the other day and almost couldn't resist the urge to buy a large box of Quaker Oatmeal just because the round box looked like it might be the exact diameter needed for building the antenna. :-) I'm sorry that you had so much trouble finding the copper wire. I bought a 100-foor roll at a hardware store that is within walking distance of my home, and they had a variety of sizes in hanging packages. It's not a very big store, and I assumed if they had it, every hardware store would have it. I need to do some on-line shopping for the copper wire and add some places to buy it to the instructions. Lots of good information here - thanks again for posting your comment. uncle frogy says: Feb 14, 2013. 2:30 AMReply question you said uninsulated wire but then mentioned wire from a motor so did you mean that you could use magnet wire which is insulated with varnish you would have to just clean the end to make a good connection. Would that be correct? uncle frogy tigers58 (author) in reply to uncle frogyFeb 14, 2013. 5:18 AMReply Yes, that's correct. I've used insulated wire that I stripped out of an old 4-wire telephone cord, and the only problem with it was that the plastic insulation on the wire made pulling the wire through the holes in the poster board more difficult. Thanks for your comment. GrumpyOldGoat in reply to tigers58Feb 14, 2013. 7:27 AMReply I have a few dead computer power supplies that have quite a few copper coils inside. How important is the gauge of the wire? tigers58 (author) in reply to GrumpyOldGoatFeb 17, 2013. 5:37 PMReply I've built a couple of earlier designs using smaller gauge wire, even one using some wire-wrap wire I had on hand, and they seemed to work OK. The larger gauge wires are easier to handle, don't kink as easily and aren't as prone to breaking as the smaller gauge wires. Thanks for the question. mccollut says: Feb 17, 2013. 4:04 PMReply does this have to be in cylindrical form ? could it be made flat ? tigers58 (author) in reply to mccollutFeb 17, 2013. 5:36 PMReply No, it doesn't have to be in cylindrical form and will work if left flat and taped to a window pane or mounted in a similar fashion. I don't think it would work very well if it were laid on a table top. Thanks for you question - several people have asked the same question.. tigers58 (author) in reply to mccollutFeb 17, 2013. 4:22 PMReply Thanks for your question. Yes, I made several flat ones that worked but were very directional. If all of the stations in your area are more or less in the same location, then a flat version of this antenna should work just fine. rwohleb says: Feb 14, 2013. 11:16 AMReply Have you tried building one of these with copper tape? You can get 50ft of 5mm copper tape from Sparkfun for $2.95. The adhesive is not conductive so you'd have to possibly throw a drop of solder at each turn.

Also, here is a flat koch snowflake build I've seen on Tekzilla: http://www.htpcdiy.com/2012/04/diy-flexible-fractal-window-hdtv.html tigers58 (author) in reply to rwohlebFeb 17, 2013. 5:26 PMReply No, I gave copper tape some thought, but I thought that would make building the antenna much more difficult for the reason you pointed out - the adhesive being non-conductive. Thanks for the question. I'll have to go check out the flat Koch snowflake build. criggie in reply to rwohlebFeb 14, 2013. 11:51 AMReply Probably better to fold the tape at the turns and to make each line in one piece. criggie says: Feb 14, 2013. 11:56 AMReply I'm not sure where you are, so can you advise what frequency its centered on? If it was made longer (ie repeated lengthwise) that would be diminishing returns on improvement, and a larger circle? What if it was two turns/layers around inside the CD tin? What would it do it not rolled up? tigers58 (author) in reply to criggieFeb 17, 2013. 5:20 PMReply Thanks for these good questions. I originally tried multiple antennas in one package, with the UHF portion centered at 600 MHz (probably explains why the antenna works so well receiving channel 38). After realizing the, to me, incredible wide bandwidth of the antenna, I reduced the design to a single fractal pattern, and later added a series of larger peaks to the ends of both fractal patterns for improved reception at lower VHF frequencies. I don't know where the point of diminishing returns is in regards to adding more repetitions of the fractal pattern and making the antenna longer. I tried overlapping the pattern to try to improve omni-directional characteristics, but it didn't help. Not rolled up produces good results that are very directional. thebeatonpath says: Feb 14, 2013. 7:49 PMReply This antenna looks much nicer than the one I was about to make (a stick with a bunch of wires attached). I'll have to give this a go! darthruin says: Feb 16, 2013. 6:41 PMReply have anyone try with glass container? have anyone try with anti UV spray for the CD plastic cover? have anyone try PVC? just my two cents... tigers58 (author) in reply to darthruinFeb 16, 2013. 7:13 PMReply Good questions. Now that I'm aware of the UV destroying plastic problem, I'll start looking for something else. Seems like the easiest might be a piece of large diameter PVC pipe with a cap on the top. Thanks for your comments. Science Illustrator says: Feb 16, 2013. 3:49 PMReply Works well, and everything needed was able to be found in the basement. Thanks tigers58 (author) in reply to Science IllustratorFeb 16, 2013. 5:23 PMReply Thanks for the report, and I'm happy that it is working for you. alzie says: Feb 15, 2013. 12:27 PMReply Re. Magic antennas, I m looking for an omni that can do 2 octaves with flat impedance the same way that a log periodic does. So far, it doesnt seem to exist.

As for TV, most of my stations are basically in the same direction, so i built a small log periodic, wire on card board. It has ~8dBi of gain, a smij better than omni's. It helps to pull in the weaker stations, and is 2D / takes up little space. 73, AC2CL tigers58 (author) in reply to alzieFeb 16, 2013. 6:48 AMReply Thanks for your comments - some good food for thought there. That wire on cardboard log periodic sounds like it is right up my alley, in regard to the materials used anyway. :-) Is it your design? Is the design posted on the Internet somewhere? One of my stepdaughters and her husband have a place out in the country, 98 miles from the nearest TV broadcast tower, and that is the perfect situation for an 8dB low cost log periodic. 73, KG0XF alzie in reply to tigers58Feb 16, 2013. 8:00 AMReply Yes, its up on the net, though i forget where. I dug for a link in my addresses. It might be in here some where: http://www.i1wqrlinkradio.com/antype/index-89.html Also, surf "log periodic design" I remember it being a trade off between taper, gain, and size. You can go long and shallow to get more gain at the expense of compactness. Since almost all of the US hdtv stations are in the uhf, you can concentrate there and the ant isnt terribly big. Also, the Zo is a function of the element feed down the middle, so you want to use some large chunky wire like #14 or #12 close together to get your 75 ohms. I have only one hd station in the vhf, so i got lazy and clipped a 4' piece of wire onto the large end of the ant to pull it in. It doesnt seem to screw up the uhf at all, so I m home free. I also made a portable fold up version for 2m / 0.7m ham bands. Works well. jimvandamme in reply to alzieFeb 16, 2013. 6:43 AMReply A discone would do it, but it's V polarized. If you can break it up into bands, you will expand your range of possibilities. Not everyone needs continuous bandwidth. jimvandamme in reply to alzieFeb 16, 2013. 6:43 AMReply A discone would do it, but it's V polarized. If you can break it up into bands, you will expand your range of possibilities. Not everyone needs continuous bandwidth.

alzie in reply to jimvandammeFeb 16, 2013. 8:05 AMReply Ive simmed that on NEC and the impedance is very lumpy.

Right, not every body needs it, but being an engineer, I m looking for the holy grail of a wide band flat impedance omni, just for the sake of perfection. Ive searched extensively and it doesnt seem to exist any where. Out of 100 yrs of antenna development by minds Way sharper than mine, just maybe it is impossible. I just hate compromises! jimvandamme in reply to alzieFeb 17, 2013. 8:28 PMReply The length of the elements needs to be very long (relative to wavelength) for it to be a true traveling wave antenna. Bowties, rhombics, beverage are made this way. If it gets to be less than a wavelength it will start having resonances. You want it to radiate, not reflect at the ends. I used to make ground penetrating radar antennas out of EMT tubing and copper tape on tarps that worked 3-30 MHz. Sort of. juanjomf says: Feb 15, 2013. 7:33 AMReply Hello, I am of uruguay and I was interested in it(him,her) very much as this great experiment it works for you. Was this antenna catching the video cable for air if this one this one codified?. tigers58 (author) in reply to juanjomfFeb 15, 2013. 8:20 AMReply Lo siento, pero no entiendo tu pregunta. Mi esposa es de Mexico, entonces por favor escribelo en espanol. Gracias! juanjomf in reply to tigers58Feb 16, 2013. 5:58 AMReply ok. no saba y los traductores online son muy malos. preguntaba ya que esta antena es para agarrar seales de aire pero captar el video/cable que llega por aire? O acercandola al cable que pasa x encima de mi casa? saludos tigers58 (author) in reply to juanjomfFeb 16, 2013. 7:06 AMReply Esta antena es solo para los seales de aire, y lo siento, pero esta antena no va a trabajar para los seales al cable. big dawg1 says: Feb 14, 2013. 12:37 PMReply I've made HDTV antenna's in the past so I am excited to try your design. One question...I have some braided 22 AWG wire with insulation. Do you see any reception problems using braided wire leaving the insulation on instead of single strand wire that is uninsulated? tigers58 (author) in reply to big dawg1Feb 15, 2013. 10:25 AMReply No, I don't see a problem with that. I made one using braided wire, and the only problem I had was the ends of the wires becoming unwound and spreading out and making it hard to thread them through the holes.

StuNutt says: Feb 14, 2013. 11:13 AMReply The antennaweb.org/stations doesn't work now, although the home page does.

Anyway, G3OCR here - a British ham (full licensee). I've no idea what frequencies are used for US HD TV, but I'm wondering if the design would scale for a 2m/70 cm dual-band antenna? A number of our EmComm Group here have "Foundation" (ie Beginners) licenses and are restricted to 10 watts - usually using a 5-watt HT with a mini-whip, and we have problems hearing them at Control unless they are close. Would this sort of antenna be better than a Slim Jim for example? Maybe you could point me to the web site from whence came your inspiration? If you want to email direct, I'm RadioG3OCR "at" Gmail.com 73, Stu tigers58 (author) in reply to StuNuttFeb 14, 2013. 9:15 PMReply The 144 MHz 2-meter ham band lies between VHF channels 6 and 7. The 420 - 450 MHz 70cm band lies between channel 13 and channel 14. The fractal antenna performs well on all of those TV channels, and I think it would work well without scaling on both the 2-meter and 70cm bands. I don't have any 2-meter nor 70cm equipment, and am unable to test the antenna at those frequencies. After the materials are rounded up it takes about two hours of steady work to build your first fractal antenna - about half that after you've done it a few times. So, why not have a volunteer build one of these and give it a go? I'd had this same question a couple of times now, so i know there are other hams that would like to know if it would work or not. chrism74 says: Feb 14, 2013. 9:41 AMReply Can you go into any detail or provide references for how designed the antenna. It's all a mystery to me. tigers58 (author) in reply to chrism74Feb 14, 2013. 8:10 PMReply It's a really long story in which the antenna design evolved from attempts to bend 20 AWG copper wire around nails driven into a piece of plywood, to hundreds of holes drilled into sheets of plexiglass, to 3 pieces of cardboard bent at 60 degree angles and tied together at the creases to form an omni-directional circle of 3 antennas, numerous tests, and, as the King of Siam would say, etc., etc., etc. until the I thought the current design worked well enough to be shared with an unsupecting world. Thanks for your interest in this Instructable. kroner says: Feb 14, 2013. 7:56 AMReply Very nicely done! Super simple design and well documented. I have a question though - If you wanted to further improve the range (?) / accuracy of this, could you make 3 of them and then daisy chain them together, so connect input lead B of the first anttena to input lead A of the second and B of the second to A of the third, etc, etc? tigers58 (author) in reply to kronerFeb 14, 2013. 7:35 PMReply I don't know about daisy chaining them together. Perhaps just mounting two of them side-by-side in front of a reflector connected together in the manner as bow ties would work.(?) All of my previous experience has been building and using dipoles, 3-element beams, inverted V's, and vertical antennas, so this whole world of fractal antennas is new to me, and I just don't know what kind of phasing would work with connecting two or more of these antennas together. Maybe it's time to cobble together some chicken wire, 2X4's and a couple of these fractal antennas and see if I can pick up the stations in Cheyenne. OddJob says: Feb 14, 2013. 6:12 AMReply Perfect timing! After my recent meltdown vis a vis the growing cable bill, I am dedicating my next day off to build one of these. Metro area test this winter, and then off to the Skog Hus to see if we can pull in any signal from the middle of God's Country (Northwestern Wisconsin)....Nice job! tigers58 (author) in reply to OddJobFeb 14, 2013. 7:07 PMReply Glad to hear from people that are going to give it a try. Please let me know how it works for you. ironsmiter says: Feb 12, 2013. 6:23 PMReply

So this may be a BIT technical, but will the pattern scale up effectively? If i went ahead and quadrupled the size, for a 1/2 wavelength antenna? Since a 100CD spindle is relatively small I envision a section of large diameter pvc pipe, mounted on the roof. So far, I've done a panel style fractal, and it does OK, but is VERY directional. I get all the channels from the north, and only a very few from the SW, unless i get up on the roof, and relocate the antenna to the other side of the house :-( An antenna like this, mounted on the roof peak, seems almost ideal. The cylinder shape would help limit the kite-flying effect of "normal" fractal antenna designs(mostly mounted on a sheet of plexiglas) If it scaled large enough, I could even use the antenna like a collar on the chimney, GREATLY simplifying mounting. tigers58 (author) in reply to ironsmiterFeb 12, 2013. 6:47 PMReply I don't know if the pattern will scale up or not. Like you, I started my experimentation with a 1/2 wavelength version (for channel 4 in the middle of the VHF low-band) using a piece of plexiglass that I had drilled the holes into. It produced good results, but was too big for hanging on a wall, and was too directional as well. The idea of a "fractal ball antenna" came to me in a dream one night, and as I experimented with different versions along that line of thought, I noticed that the antennas I was designing for the UHF bands were also performing really well on the lower VHF bands as well. I moved from the idea of different sized antennas for VHF and UHF bands to one design for both. Just the other day I sealed one of the CD cases with clear silicon caulk, mounted it on a short piece of PVC pipe and mounted it outside sticking above the roof line of my home. It picks up 50 digital channels vs. the 42 channels picked up by the same antenna in doors. So, in short, I'd be interested to know how scaling up the antenna works out if you try it.

wkearney99 in reply to tigers58Feb 14, 2013. 4:22 AMReply Exposure to the Sun's UV rays is going to kill that plastic. But discolored plastic won't affect the signal receiving properties, it'll just look crappy and eventually get brittle and break. I know because I happened to use one of those cylindrical lids for something in the spring and left it outside. By the end of summer it was ruined. Still, for the price of a 'free' leftover from making discs, it's a bargain to replace. tigers58 (author) in reply to wkearney99Feb 14, 2013. 7:04 PMReply Thanks for the information. I hadn't thought about UV rays destroying the cover, but I can understand how they would. Good to know. caitlinsdad says: Feb 12, 2013. 8:59 AMReply Nice. Is this an omnidirectional antenna or do you have to turn it or lay it down to get better reception on some signals?

tigers58 (author) in reply to wkearney99Feb 14, 2013. 7:04 PMReply Thanks for the information. I hadn't thought about UV rays destroying the cover, but I can understand how they would. Good to know. caitlinsdad says: Feb 12, 2013. 8:59 AMReply Nice. Is this an omnidirectional antenna or do you have to turn it or lay it down to get better reception on some signals? myxylplyx in reply to caitlinsdadFeb 14, 2013. 2:23 PMReply In his very first comment tigers58 (author) says: "I designed it to be omnidirectional, hence the cylindrical shape, but I've noticed that it is not completely omnidirectional - turning it will improve the reception of some more distant stations. Turning it on its side makes it much more directional than placing it in an upright position." caitlinsdad in reply to myxylplyxFeb 14, 2013. 4:30 PMReply Thanks, that was the original reply which was "stickied" as the top post and separated from my comment, a quirk of the commenting system here. perfo says: Feb 14, 2013. 10:11 AMReply I like the ideas here and to have such a great result is better again. I had a thought though, about placing it as a collar around a chimney (even a clay one) and that is it may not work due to changing the inductance of the whole set up and maybe (especially in rain) causing localised magnetic paths to form. tigers58 (author) in reply to perfoFeb 14, 2013. 2:59 PMReply I don't know how big your chimney is, but making one of these antennas of sufficient diameter to go around a chimney seems to me to be moving away from the goal of using fractal designs to build a smaller more efficient antenna. But, maybe a larger version would be great - I really can't say. I know a lot of ham radio operators would love to be able to stick something the size of a five gallon plastic bucket on their roofs if it contained an antenna with the bandwidth to cover the 10, 15 and 20m bands. I would only advise doing the scaling up in small steps, refining the design as you go, rather than going for broke on one large antenna. osterac says: Feb 14, 2013. 10:54 AMReply Oh ho ho! This looks right up my alley! And the cylinder design, genius! Came to you in a dream you say? Wish I had dreams like that! I think I might build 2 of these, one for my attic and one for the TV that isn't wired to the antenna in the attic. The attic has an amp, will be interesting to see how it behaves with an amp. I'm in a good area for testing, lots of stations at various distances/directions. right now I just have bunny ears in my attic, The furthest signal I get now, 7.1, is 73 miles, media center shows it at 6/6 signal strength. Some are far weaker (even though they are closer) like a few in the teens and 20s. Congrats on being featured in the newsletter! Off to build... tigers58 (author) in reply to osteracFeb 14, 2013. 1:45 PMReply Thanks for the comments. In the dream it was a ball made up of about 10 copper wires bent into the fractal pattern going up from the bottom to the top like meridians on a globe. The cylinder is as near as I've come to reproducing the shape I saw in the dream. 73 miles on rabbit ears is pretty good! Please let me know how the amp works out for you. What do you think the bandwidth of this antenna actually turns out to be? Since you mentioned you're an extra, have you tried using this for 2m/70cm, receiving and possibly transmitting? tigers58 (author) in reply to rctFeb 14, 2013. 1:35 PMReply I don't know what the bandwidth might be. I've only tested it as a TV and FM Radio receive antenna. I sold my 2m transceiver a couple of years ago, and don't have a VHF or UHF equipment to use for a test. I'd really be interesting in hearing from any ham that gives this antenna a try.

Thanks for the comments. OrienteeringGuy says: Feb 14, 2013. 12:40 PMReply It would be nice to know about the performance of your antenna. I assume that it is not directional. How far away are the stations you are able to receive without drop-out? EricHi says: Feb 12, 2013. 6:17 PMReply Really nice design and a well written article. Hope you don't mind me saying this but I also appreciate seeing people your age (I'm in this age group too) keeping up with science, hobbies, and development. I will try my hand at duplicating your design - really innovative making it cylindrical and fitting it into a CD container. "Keep-a-goin". Thanks! dchall8 says: Feb 12, 2013. 5:32 PMReply It's really nice to see a little genius at play in Instructables. Folding and crimping wire into a weird shape is problematic to say the least. Threading wire through holes to form the same shape is a stroke of genius. Then mounting it in the CD case is sweet. Great job!! What about range? I'm about 60 miles from San Antonio's antenna farm and 40 miles from the Corpus Christi farm in the other direction. I'd rather tune into San Antonio, but anything would be better than nothing. tigers58 (author) in reply to dchall8Feb 12, 2013. 6:12 PMReply Thanks for the kind words. At this time I have very little data as to the range of this antenna. I live 31 miles away from the farthest broadcast towers that is also one of the strongest signals at my home. However, that distance is offset by the fact that I live in Colorado, and that tower is on top of one of the front range mountains and is a couple of thousand feet higher than the elevation here. Your situation there seems like a perfect test of this antenna's range, and I would be more than happy to mail you an antenna if you would promise to give me a report on the performance of the antenna. rimar2000 says: Feb 12, 2013. 9:50 AMReply Very interesting. Have you noticed a real improvement with respect other designs?