Not to belabor the subject, but I had an RF engineer friend who had access to some very sophisticated signal measuring equipment, and we did many actual signal receive comparisons on several satellites...with both antennas
Several leos and on AO40. We used coax switching for an immediate comparison, and the quadrifilar was superior....
Easy and inexpensive to build...
See quadfilxxxxx on:
http://home.san.rr.com/doguimont/uploads
With detailed measurements for 2M, 435 and wx satellites....I scaled one for 2.4 gig feed on a 36" dish, and it worked very well, but not sure it was fully illuminated....
73, Dave, WB6LLO dguimon1@san.rr.com
Disagree: I learn....
Pulling for P3E...
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Guimont" dguimon1@san.rr.com To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 1:37 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Egg beater vs Quadrifilars
See quadfilxxxxx on:
http://home.san.rr.com/doguimont/uploads
With detailed measurements for 2M, 435 and wx satellites....I scaled one for 2.4 gig feed on a 36" dish, and it worked very well, but not sure it was fully illuminated....
73, Dave, WB6LLO dguimon1@san.rr.com Disagree: I learn.... Pulling for P3E...
Hi Dave, WB6LLO
Your Quadrifilar Helix will work very well as a feed for a dish and with a minimum spillower if the F/D ratio of the dish is ranging from 0.3 to 0.35
See my article " Experimental Investigation on Quadrifilar Helix Antennas for 2400 MHz" publisched in AMSAT-Journal May/June 2004
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
participants (2)
-
Dave Guimont -
i8cvs