Multibanding the W3DZZ

● G3XSD’s personal aims:

 To build a wire antenna for 80/40/30 to complement
the existing rebuilt original CobWebb
20/18/15/13/10, that fits the estate ( 70’X70’)
● Secondary aims:
 To modify if possible to allow multiband (5 or
6 bands ( with or without an ATU) to provide
an option to others with small estates
 Multi-banding and myths
● SWR- low SWR defines how well an antenna radiates
- No. Think about a dummy load!
● No-tune transmitters have 50 ohm o/p because dipoles are the best radiators

-No. A double Zepp is 3dB better but has a 126 ohm i/p Z!
● An ATU tunes the antenna
- and a steamroller rolls steam! No. An ATU is an impedence matcher.
● An ATU is inherently lossy
- No. Cheap/small ones are, so are most auto tuners due to the small size of inductors.
Proper (usually large and expensive) ones are very low loss
● More current flows in resonant antennas
-not really.
● Baluns transform according to their ratio
-no. But they introduce losses. Best effect is to reduce unbalanced currents on coax
feeders. Worst effect is harmonic radiation due to toroidal core saturation ( if used)
 What informs my antenna implementations
● Radiation efficiency
– Losses: ohmic losses, ground losses,radiation resistance
-wire gauge; even balanced antennas have ground losses-so make it
as high as possible
● Aerial aperture
– Spatial size of charge acceleration areas
-antennas less than 0.66 of a half wave on the lowest operating
frequency will have degraded radiation performance ( size matters)
● For multi-banding look for SWRs under 3:1 if possible to allow rig based
ATUs to keep costs low – if cost is no object then neither is SWR – it just
does not matter. To comply with my secondary aim then SWR <3.0 is the
target.
 The candidate - W3DZZ
● This does 80/40( no ATU) in its original form
● First multiband version by OH2EC
● Improved by OZ1CX who made it a 5 bander
 The G3XSD design
● Limitations of the real estate 70ftX70ft
● House in a stupid place on the plot
 Variation caused by limitations
● 100ft max run as a near horizontal vee (80/40)
- amusingly the vee angle is 100 degs!
● 30m inverted vee orientation
● Max height ( roof height) 23ft (house is a
chalet)
● OZ1CX is 108ft+ * G3XSD antenna will be
shorter
 132FT DIPOLE vs G3XSD/W3DZZ
Theoretical expectations

132 ft dipole 100ft G3XSD with traps

125ft

Band Wavelengths Feedpoint ¼ Feedpoint ¼ L,C,R

In antenna waves waves
80 half 1 0.947**^ R
40 1 2 1^^ R
30 1.609 3.24 1* R
20 2 4 3.765^ L
17 2.555 5.110 4.85 L
15 3.1275 6.255 5.63^ L
13 3.695 7.39 6.613 L
10 4 8 7.53 R
Key: *=because of the // 10MHz dipole
**= due to L of traps Match on odd number ¼ waves
^= should be reasonably useable Worst:13m,17m,20m
^^=due to resonant traps
 Theoretical conclusions
● Really not too bad
– 80m ought to resonate within the band
– 17m/15m/20m furthest from odd 1/4 wave boundaries, but
80/40/30/13m/10m look promising
– 41ft 10MHz dipole could be trapped with Sotabeam mini traps at 33’ 6” to
yield better 20m performance

17 0.350
Column 2 fractions of ¼ wave
15 0.130
20 0.265
Effect of the two dipoles in //? Probably very little. Actual effects of
site to be tested pragmatically.
Possibly better if antenna length adjusted but given the difficulty of
doing this – test antenna unchanged. Might be possible to adjust
length with capacity hats
 The proof of the pudding………...
● Five tests for evaluations:
– Actual global performance
● Use WSPR over fixed period for consistent conditions
using benchmark CobWebb omni dipole of known good
performance to evaluate G3XSD version of W3DZZ
– Measured groundwave field strength
● Fldigi signal/noise (idling signal) ratio (dB) for accurate and
consistent automated measurement at a station outside
proximity field radius ( typically 5 to 10 miles) thus
measuring radiated field. Ensure no sky wave NVIS. At
present e.g. midday for 80m, 17 to 10m anytime!
 Tests (contd)
● Given decision not to modify antenna, measure swr on
each band at resonance AND at nearest digimodes
frequencies. Also check if matches can be achieved
using internal rig ATUs for bands worse than 1.5:1
using TS-590 ( mid range price), FT-450D (cheap
Txcvr), and effectiveness of usage of external ATUs
using Palstar AT1KP (expensive),MFJ901B ( cheap
and portable [small])
● Fourthly, WebSDR reports for the 80m dipole
because direct remote S-meter readings are available
 Tests (contd)
● Given decision not to modify antenna, measure swr on
each band at resonance AND at nearest digimodes
frequencies. Also check if matches can be achieved
using internal rig ATUs for bands worse than 1.5:1
using TS-590 ( mid range price), FT-450D (cheap
Txcvr), and effectiveness of usage of external ATUs
using Palstar AT1KP (expensive),MFJ901B ( cheap
and portable [small])
● Fourthly, WebSDR reports for the 80m dipole
because direct remote S-meter readings are available
 One last test – problems on the
feeder?
● Would be evidenced by RF in the shack due to
common mode currents on the outer surface of
the coax screen
● The test: take swr readings then connect an
extra 12 ft or so of extra feeder in line: take swr
readings again if they are changed you have
problems! You are certainly radiating from the
feeder and your swr readings are meaningless
● Let’s take a look at the WSPR test results
 WSPR tests

G3XSD/W3DZZ CobWebb
5W 20% tx periods 5W 20% tx periods
20m 14095.6 1400-1700UT 20m 14095.6 1400-1630UT
Condx the same
 Groundwave signal strength dB
Antenna G3XSD/W3DZZ Antenna CobWebb
Frequency (MHz) dB s/n Frequency dB s/n
3.580 33 3.580 -
7.070 27 7.070 -
10.142 25 10.142 -
14.070 26 14.070 27
18.143 27 18.143 27
21.070 26 21.070 29
24.920 - 24.920 27
28.120 18 28.120 25

Fldigi in idle mode. Ground wave should decline gradually with frequency increase.
G3XSD/W3DZZ produces useful results, except for 13m (not much loss at this end of
the cycle!).
 SWR,resonances & matching
G3XSD/ From (x)from Ib inband ATU Mid-cost cheap cheap
W3DZZ MFJ-269 Palstar Ob out
band 590 rig 450D rig MFJ901
band swr swr@dig Z
80 Nn or Y Nn or Y Nn or Y
80 1.5(1.1) 1.9(1.5) L (ib)
40 1.2(1.0) 1.2(1.22) R 40 Nn or Y Nn or Y Nn or Y

30 1.0 1.1(1.0) R 30 Nn Nn Nn

20 2.0 3.1 L(ob) 20 Y N Y

17 2.0 3.0 L(ob) 17 Y N Y

15 2.1 2.6 L(ob) 15 Y Y Y

13 2.1 2.7 L(ob) 13 Y* Y Y*

10 1.2 1.8 C(ob) 10 Y Y Y

The expensive Palstar AT1KP matched all necessary bands as well as the 590 internal
and MFJ901 portable ATU, but like the 901 required manual adjustment. The 590 was
automatic. The AT1KP was very low loss.
WebSDR NVIS results for 80m from
Rugely (Staffs) and Weert (NL)

G4FPH SDR Cheshire

1842UT 17/04/2017 80W
10 over 9 ( S9+10dB)
Dusk [61dB achieved as
peak minutes later]
SDR Weert

NL ‘Nightowls SDR’ Weert

NL in the south near
Belgian border
-1840UT dusk 17/04/2017
S9+
……. results of that test for common
mode currents
● Two different lengths of extra coax were
inserted using two barrel connectors
● This gave three sets of swr readings over 80 to
10m
● All three were the same – no problems
 Conclusions
● It has been a success by my definitions and aims
- 7 bands have good radiation performance, only 13m did
not produce strong radiation ( but did have a comparable
SWR to the other bands) – proves that SWR is no indicator
of antenna radiation efficiency
● Received signal strength is remarkably constant and usable
across the bands
● Variants: W3DZZ 2 bands,OZ1CX 5 bands*,
G3XSD 7 bands**
*G5RV type match **ATU match