Remove this ad

avatar

Spyra

Posts: 16 Member Since: 04/28/16

Lead

Apr 28 16 10:02 AM

Tags : :

It seems like height is very important for antenna as it's directly related to degree of interference. I have also heard that antennas at high place catches signal better. Based on your experiences, what is the least height of the antenna so it works at best level?
Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Remove this ad
avatar

Sellie

Posts: 34 Member Since:03/22/16

#1 [url]

May 3 16 3:58 AM

It depends on how far you want to send or receive the signal and the size of the antenna. As far as I know, 70 ft is usually the number people use for their antenna height. According to this article, the basic theory says the height is 1.5 wavelength. I'm not really good with the theory so maybe you'll have better luck reading the article.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Spyra

Posts: 16 Member Since:04/28/16

#2 [url]

May 4 16 4:04 AM

Sellie wrote:
It depends on how far you want to send or receive the signal and the size of the antenna. As far as I know, 70 ft is usually the number people use for their antenna height. According to this article, the basic theory says the height is 1.5 wavelength. I'm not really good with the theory so maybe you'll have better luck reading the article.

Thank you for the link. That explains why my cousins didn't get good signal reception when they tried to put their small antenna very high. They received various signals but none was clear enough. They thought the antenna was broken. They are looking to use dipoles antenna and I read that its best height is around 40 ft.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

billfrank

Posts: 31 Member Since:05/19/16

#3 [url]

May 19 16 4:30 PM

Sellie wrote:
It depends on how far you want to send or receive the signal and the size of the antenna. As far as I know, 70 ft is usually the number people use for their antenna height. According to this article, the basic theory says the height is 1.5 wavelength. I'm not really good with the theory so maybe you'll have better luck reading the article.

This is the same question that I have been asking friends but none of them was able to utterly convince me about the best height to set an antenna. The most common belief has been that the higher the aerial, the better the signal. What a myth! That article is an eye opener.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Pinstripe

Posts: 51 Member Since:01/26/16

#4 [url]

May 23 16 12:20 AM

Without getting too technical, it seems that an optimal antenna height would have to be relevant to other antennas nearby. That, and ham radio signals are not going to be as strong television signals, so your antenna is going to have to compete with them somehow.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

w8eeo

Posts: 2,219 Member Since:10/04/08

#5 [url]

May 23 16 6:31 PM

A handy web site when deciding how long a wire should be and how high

It allows you to give a frequency and it will roll out the length or measure the length of your antenna and it will tell you where the wire should be resonant.
The site is an old one but very nice and will save a lot of head scratching etc.
Be sure to click all the links on the page for information needed when you are designing a new antenna or just good reading material about many antenna situations. Have fun! build something. http://www.qsl.net/kd4sai/antencal.html

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Chocolat3

Posts: 50 Member Since:03/11/16

#6 [url]

Jun 3 16 1:34 AM

Pinstripe wrote:
Without getting too technical, it seems that an optimal antenna height would have to be relevant to other antennas nearby. That, and ham radio signals are not going to be as strong television signals, so your antenna is going to have to compete with them somehow.

Thank you for the input. I didn't consider that other types of antenna can also interfere with the radio's reception because the signal type is different. Assuming we want to get better signal reception for radio instead of TV, we should put radio's antenna higher and at clearer area, right?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

jmsmart

Posts: 31 Member Since:05/24/16

#7 [url]

Jun 3 16 1:10 PM

Pinstripe wrote:
Without getting too technical, it seems that an optimal antenna height would have to be relevant to other antennas nearby. That, and ham radio signals are not going to be as strong television signals, so your antenna is going to have to compete with them somehow.

Indeed, you have put it forward in a very simple way. I think that explains why it is difficult to get a good signal in some areas because of a lot of antennas nearby.
It is also now clear to me that ham radio signals compete with television signals, so it means that you have to consider several other factors, of course apart from the antenna size.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help