|
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
On May 13, 12:58*pm, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Grimly Curmudgeon saying something like: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember " saying something like: I have been fascinated by the idea of using parabolas for UHF ever since UHF was invented. When we went to the maternity hospital for the birth of out first child (now 35) I anticipated a long wait and took a notebook and a textbook, and set about planning the construction of a monster. However the child was born very rapidly, and thereafter was such a drain on time and resounces that I soon had to abandon the project. Still in my loft to this day are some curved members. the start of the prototype. Not unknown for old sat dishes to be used as wi-fi and 3G antennas. To follow up... UHF and VHF on an old 1.8m dishhttp://www.dtvforum.info/index.php?showtopic=84979 The pics from that post...http://i46.tinypic.com/scwd1h.jpghtt...com/necpjl.jpg This has got my juices flowing and I've stuck an old 1m MMDS dish up in my attic space, pointing out through the roof structure with a folded dipole cut for ~580MHz at the focal point. My reasoning is that the gain of the dish will compensate for the roof thickness. Last night it was providing a cracking signal to my PC telly card and today I intend to connect it to the digitelly and see what I can pull in. This avoids ****ing around with poles and external antennas on top of them. Somewhere I've got some info on this. I believe there's something about a parabola not acting properly as a parabola below a certain number of wavelengths -- about 20? Bill Bill |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
On Thursday, May 13th, 2010 at 05:54:55h -0700, Wrights Aerials wrote:
Somewhere I've got some info on this. I believe there's something about a parabola not acting properly as a parabola below a certain number of wavelengths -- about 20? But some people claim that the Channelmaster CM 4251 UHF 7 foot parabolic antenna was the best and most powerful production consumer UHF TV antenna ever manufactured. http://www.rocketroberts.COM/cm4251/cm4251.htm I have always been fascinated at what would be the results of comparing one of these to a Plemi-Margon 103 element or Fuba 92 element UHF wideband antenna for long distance (80 miles or more) reception, or with the closest currently available equivalent, the AntennasDirect 91XG. http://www.antennasdirect.COM/91XG_HDTV_Antenna.html |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember " saying something like: Somewhere I've got some info on this. I believe there's something about a parabola not acting properly as a parabola below a certain number of wavelengths -- about 20? I dunno, maybe it all goes to cock at certain freqs but it's working well enough now. I hooked it up to the digitelly and it's just fine, which actually surprised me. This is pretty much the type of dish I have url:http://www.wi-pipe.com/24sd27-24dbi-...85022ece8707f7 with a folded dipole of 1.5mm insulated wire taped to a wooden former and connnected to an old 300/75 matcher salvaged from the back of an ancient portable. Over here the old MMDS dishes are to be found laying around as a lot of people ditched the system and moved to Sky/Freesat. Previously, I was using this dish as a 3G link for across-field treetop datalinkage, with a flat plate antenna mounted at the focal point. Talk about cheekiness - get this for a price... http://www.dtvs.co.nz/index.php?main...oducts_ id=85 Same idea, but with a log-periodic. Now, I just happen to have an old indoor LP set-top antenna and the backbone of it just happens to be the right size to insert into the boom of the MMDS dish. I'll leave that for another day. |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
On Thu, 13 May 2010 05:54:55 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: Somewhere I've got some info on this. I believe there's something about a parabola not acting properly as a parabola below a certain number of wavelengths -- about 20? I was hoping someone would add to this. I used a parabolic reflector with a microphone before the days of shotgun mikes and can remember *something* about the frequency response drop-off being related to the distance of mic to dish or similar, but the brain no longer recalls the details http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabolic_reflector http://www.antenna-theory.com/antenn...ctors/dish.php |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
On May 15, 1:56*pm, Albert Ross wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010 05:54:55 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: Somewhere I've got some info on this. I believe there's something about a parabola not acting properly as a parabola below a certain number of wavelengths -- about 20? I was hoping someone would add to this. I used a parabolic reflector with a microphone before the days of shotgun mikes and can remember *something* about the frequency response drop-off being related to the distance of mic to dish or similar, but the brain no longer recalls the details Don't you have to apply bass boost and treble cut when you use a parabolic mike, for that reason? Bill |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
On Sat, 15 May 2010 06:27:57 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: On May 15, 1:56*pm, Albert Ross wrote: On Thu, 13 May 2010 05:54:55 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: Somewhere I've got some info on this. I believe there's something about a parabola not acting properly as a parabola below a certain number of wavelengths -- about 20? I was hoping someone would add to this. I used a parabolic reflector with a microphone before the days of shotgun mikes and can remember *something* about the frequency response drop-off being related to the distance of mic to dish or similar, but the brain no longer recalls the details Don't you have to apply bass boost and treble cut when you use a parabolic mike, for that reason? Yes, and the bass cutoff especially relates not only to the diameter of the dish but to the depth AFAICR (or think I can remember). The Grampian was a yard in diameter (pre-metric I suspect) and relatively flat compared to some of the smaller more tulip-shaped jobbies which had a sharp loss of lower frequencies. |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , J G Miller writes On Monday, May 3rd, 2010 at 20:22:29h +0100, Adrian C wrote: Put simply, in an _urban area_ the device isn't bling enough. Maybe not. But how about this one? http://www.kathrein-scala.COM/catalog/PR-TV.pdf I would be most interested to know the proprietor of Wright's Aerials opinion on this type of design and its performance compared to the Yagi-Uda. If I'm not mis-reading the information, that's a single-channel aerial, available for your specified UHF channel. Not much good for multi-channel TV use. Not very small either, 5ft 8 tall, 3ft wide and 18" deep. Fnarr.. |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
In article , Albert Ross
wrote: On Thu, 13 May 2010 05:54:55 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: Somewhere I've got some info on this. I believe there's something about a parabola not acting properly as a parabola below a certain number of wavelengths -- about 20? I was hoping someone would add to this. Afraid I've only just noticed the thread and this topic, and the interest in mic parabolas rather than EH ones. FWIW I have two AES publications on this. One a Journal paper from 1985, the other a (better, I think) Convention Paper from 2002. Parabolic Reflector Microphones Juha Backman Paper 5499 112th Convention Munich 2002 May 10-13 I used a parabolic reflector with a microphone before the days of shotgun mikes and can remember *something* about the frequency response drop-off being related to the distance of mic to dish or similar, but the brain no longer recalls the details The gain will depend on how close the mic is to the actual focus produced by the reflected source. In part due to the real source not being at 'infinity' but also because the mic may not be at the parabolic focus. Also, as you'd expect, due to the relationship between the size/shape of the parabola and the wavelength. The above gives both theory and some measurements. I was surprised, looking at it, to see that the gain behaviour seems to hold up fairly well until you reach almost down to the wavelength being similar to the size of the parabola. i.e. much longer wavelengths than assuming a parabola needs to be twenty times the wavelength. However again as you'd expect the gain does vary with wavelength. Just that the simple scaling breaks down when you approach long wavelengths. Slainte, Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
How to install your new antenna [Instructions]
On Wed, 19 May 2010 18:23:34 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote: In article , Albert Ross wrote: Afraid I've only just noticed the thread and this topic, and the interest in mic parabolas rather than EH ones. FWIW I have two AES publications on this. One a Journal paper from 1985, the other a (better, I think) Convention Paper from 2002. Parabolic Reflector Microphones Juha Backman Paper 5499 112th Convention Munich 2002 May 10-13 I used a parabolic reflector with a microphone before the days of shotgun mikes and can remember *something* about the frequency response drop-off being related to the distance of mic to dish or similar, but the brain no longer recalls the details The gain will depend on how close the mic is to the actual focus produced by the reflected source. In part due to the real source not being at 'infinity' but also because the mic may not be at the parabolic focus. Also, as you'd expect, due to the relationship between the size/shape of the parabola and the wavelength. The above gives both theory and some measurements. It's beginning to come back to me now! Yes the source isn't really at infinity and the mic diaphragm is *near* the focus but it's close enough to work in the Real World. I was surprised, looking at it, to see that the gain behaviour seems to hold up fairly well until you reach almost down to the wavelength being similar to the size of the parabola. i.e. much longer wavelengths than assuming a parabola needs to be twenty times the wavelength. However again as you'd expect the gain does vary with wavelength. Just that the simple scaling breaks down when you approach long wavelengths. Ah yes that was the interesting bit where the wavelength was involved. Thanks! I think what I may have been semi-remembering was to do with phase relationships. Or I may just be confused . . . |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com