If my plans included the 17 and 12 meter bands I would have purchased one of these kits with no questions asked. However, I felt my need for only 20, 15 and 10 meters (6m maybe) were not sufficiently addressed by the kits. Yes, you can get wiring just for these bands, but the cost differential was slight.

So I decided to custom pick parts for my own custom variation of the hex beam. The hub for the six fiberglass poles was a logical place to begin.

The hex beam has been around long enough to have a cottage industry to support it. Ever since the March 2009 QST article more manufacturers have emerged. The base plate suggested in Leo’s QST article and offered by most of the manufacturers use two U Bolts to hold each fiberglass pole. The HexKit.com baseplate is one example…

The Hexkit.com baseplate

The instantly obvious issue is the way these flat plate units hold the round fiberglass pole. The U-Shape of the bolt is good, but squeezing the round pole to the flat plate can easily stress the pole. This is easily circumvented with saddle clamps and other methods that have been around for centuries, but I guess the stress on these poles is sufficiently low to not be a problem. I did notice many hex beam sites reinforcing the poles in the hub area while others have welded metal pipes instead of clamps. Perhaps there is a problem with fiberglass poles against flat plates after all.

Last year when I started thinking about making a hex beam, I seriously considered purchasing just the aluminum plate and purchasing saddle clamps of the correct size from DX Engineering like this example…

DX Engineering Saddleclamp

The mechanical benefit over U-Bolts is obvious. That said, hundreds of amateurs have been carefully using the flat plates with perfect success so it appears the more proper saddle clamp approach is only marginally necessary. However, I like doing things the more traditional way and swore I would use saddle clamps when it came time to build my own hex beam.

Time passed and other distractions caused me to shelve the project for a bit.

Then lo and behold… DX Engineering decided to enter the hex beam fray. Everything about their hex beam offering seemed pretty much run of the mill with the sole exception being their hub and especially the way they connect the poles to the hub. Here is a close view of the pole attachment point…

Where the pole meets the hub.

Wow. This offers the benefit of a saddle clamp, but with the saddle running the whole length of the pole-hub interface. Brilliant.

The hub costs about the same as the offerings from other vendors so there was no real financial advantage of any particular model. The sole exception is folks who make their own plate from raw materials and trade their time for cash savings; Kudos to them. My time is worth a bit more than the hundred or so dollars hex beam hubs cost.

Needless to say specifying the DX Engineering hex beam hub in my design was a no brainer and that’s exactly what I did earlier this week. The web site said they were out of stock, but it arrived in a few days during a snowy mid-atlantic Saturday anyway.

I have purchased DX Engineering products before with the primary feature being excellent documentation. I decided to see if my Lego building seven year old could put this product together. Let’s see what happens…

The seven year old had no problems at all except for that V-Bolt moment.

So the DX Engineering Hex Beam hub is here and the project is officially underway. I patiently await the arrival of wire and rope from The Wireman and fiberglass poles from MaxGain Systems. Hopefully by March I will have my 20-15-10-6 meter contest band hex beam ready to go for the Virginia QSO Party.

Ever since the 2009 QST article many folks, myself included, became aware of the simple elegance of the Hexagonal Beam (also known as Hexbeam generally and Hex-Beam® by Traffie Technology).

Indeed the simulated and reported performance of these Hex Beam antennas appears to be quite reasonable for the size. The “hex-beam” group on Yahoo has been buzzing away with discussion.

Originally an organization called “Traffie Technology” offered Hex-Beam products.

Another vendor came along with parts and kits for DIY hex beams at HexKit.com.

Then the QST article in early 2009, written by K4KIO, highlighted a different topology inspired by G3TXQ where the size of the frame and arrangement of the wires differ from the classic Hex-Beam to yield more broadband performance on each of the 20-10 meter bands with the burden of slightly larger size.

Each Hexbeam “style” is covered in superb detail at G3TXQ’s web site…

So the hex beam nuts had two choices of hex beam products: The Classic Hexbeam from Traffie Technologies and the Broadband Hexbeam created by G3TXQ and offered by K4KIO.

One of my favorite amateur radio companies, DX Engineering, came out with their own kit version of the broadband hex beam design called the Hexxagonal Beam.

So now we have four major suppliers of hexbeam kits and/or parts…

• Traffie Technology with the HEX-BEAM®
• HexKit
• K4KIO with the G3TXQ Broad band Hexagonal Beam
• DX Engineering with their HEXXAGONAL BEAM (a version of the G3TXQ)

The various names are humorous. Only Traffie Technology has a registered trade mark on HEX-BEAM®. DX Engineering is trying to claim trade mark on HEXX and HEXXOGONAL using Copyrights which is a bit bizarre. K4KIO discusses trademarks/copyrights on his site very briefly. Two of the three web sites reveal a surprising lack of understanding of what Copyrights and Trademarks are. Oh well.

With four competitors in the Hex Beam supply biz, I suggest the Hex Beam has arrived. These companies know you are out there and are competing for your antenna dollars. Traffie Technology offers the original smaller hex beam where both the driver and reflector are in the shape of a W; Traffie’s web site has a tech section which may suggest the Traffie version is not the classic, but something slightly different and more broad banded. K4KIO has the terrific QST article bringing attention to the G3TXQ broadband design. DX Engineering provides an excellent engineering background to the G3TXQ design stemming from their years of many well engineered antenna products; They have a spiffy new approach to the center base plate.

Look at each of their web sites and you will see the points they make in an attempt to win you over. This has better engineering… This has fewer parts… This has longer history… etc.

Note about Antenna Simulations
Note that some of the suppliers above, and many amateur radio antenna manufacturers in general, argue their antenna designs are not possible to simulate correctly in today’s NEC and other programs. Traffie mentions this on his tech page. Arrow Antennas told me the same thing for something as simple as their 440 MHz Yagi beam claiming no simulation works for their antenna.

Simulation has its limits and the lower cost versions of the available NEC programs often don’t have enough elements to properly model up something like the hex beam antenna, but it can be done with the more capable versions.

If an antenna manufacturer suggests simulations don’t match reality they either don’t understand reality, don’t understand simulations or are hiding something. No modern antenna engineering is performed without simulations (and of course real testing) these days. Antennas far more complex than any seen in amateur circles, including the hex beam, are successfully designed on the computer first with great success. Any manufacturer thinking their design can fool a competently modeled simulation of same is suspicious.

This does NOT mean these manufacturers don’t produce good quality results as hard core experimentation can and does work. Edison was weak on theory, but strong on trying everything experimentally; Edison experimented his way to success on several projects. However, Tesla was strong on theory. Tesla’s AC power system won the battle against Edison’s DC power system even before the first wire was laid down.

The point is Antenna Engineers howl at the idea any amateur antenna has supernatural powers that thwart decades old simulation abilities.

Its all good news though
The good news is the Hex Beam directional antenna in almost any form gives good performance in a compact package. In the end, we are the real winners. Go get you one…

However, I just had to toot the horn of one company who has consistently provided great service. That company is DX Engineering.

Occasionally I find little issues here and there with their products, but their score card is really near perfect.

I wanted to highlight just one simple aspect of their service.

In support of the 43 foot vertical antenna I have been posting about this week, I placed two more orders for extra parts I forgot to plan for. The most recent order included a new radial plate (that can handle clamps for 2 inch OD pipe), radial wire hardware (the 20 that come with the unit and 40 more), a new u clamp and a new can of anti-seize compound.

A look at the gallery below reveals the attention they pay on making good survivable shipments of their products.

Yes, I realize the products I ordered are already pretty tough, but this is the way DX Engineering packages everything I have received from them tough or not. Plus they have always shipped the same day I ordered and, from Ohio to Virginia, I get it in two business days for about $9 shipping.

I know… I know you are probably thinking why is this guy bothering us with such a silly post about a box and packing. It is simple really. If DX Engineering focuses attention on packing things well to they get to their destination one might assume they apply the same good habits towards the other parts of their business. From the quality of everything I have received from them thus far, this is turning out to be true.

I wish some of the klutzes selling ham gear on Ebay would be as concerned about packaging. I sure wish the guy who sold me the Johnson KW Matchbox had double boxed it; one of the antenna terminals got bent… ackpf!

Do other vendors pack well too? I am sure most do. If I receive something from them and am amazed by their packing, I will promptly post good things about them. Currently, however, I am working towards the Virginia QSO Party and this 43 foot vertical installation gamble I am taking has me fully utilizing the great product line from DX Engineering… over and over again; I have four or five black hats to prove it.

Good show DX Engineering… please thank your shipping people for me. The little details matter to some of us. They are doing good things for your image.

It has been serving as the focus of twenty-eight 33′ radials and a 16.6′ vertical antenna for over a year with great results. A QSO, a 20 meter phone QSO, with a station in Australia was the highlight. Okay he had a stack of four 20 meter beams phased and pointing straight at me, but it still makes me like my dirt based 20 meter vertical.

The old antenna has a custom home-brew mount which required an insulated ground pipe to work correctly. This pipe was a piece of PVC about 1.5 inches in diameter.

After a year of service, here is what the antenna looks like…

16 Foot Vertical

Don’t laugh… it works weeds and all.

This antenna works on 20, 17 and 15 meters, but is rather pointless for 10, 40, etc. for obvious reasons. So recently I decided to change the vertical to a new 43 foot, tuner required, model to gain access to other bands with as little change as possible. As this antenna desires to be attached to a 2 inch OD pipe, I dutifully purchased one at the local home center and replaced the smaller PVC pipe of the former antenna.

Things were going splendidly until I tried to clamp the radial plate to the new two inch OD pipe…

DX Engineering Radial Plate with 2 inch OD pipe

Hmmm, the holes in the DX Engineering Radial plate would not accommodate clamps this large even though the instructions that came with the antenna clearly suggest it would.

Could it be the current Radial Plate was different than the one two years ago?

An email to DX Engineering promptly confirmed my suspicions. They changed the design of the plate to wider slots to accommodate larger clamps in addition to the originally supported narrow clamps.

They did this without an obvious change to the model name to emphasize the difference.

They suggested the hardened stainless steel would most certainly harm all, but the toughest drill bits. My choices are to take it to a machine shop to enlarge the holes or just purchase a new one. I have access to a machine shop, but have decided to just purchase another one and save the older unit for other projects.

DX Engineering perhaps could have done something different here. On the other hand, at least they are continuing the development of their product lines. A little lesson in Configuration Management would go a long way to helping them clearly name new revisions of products something different.

Oh well. I remain a big fan of DX Engineering if nothing else for the superior materials used. The old radial plate has been sitting in the dirt for over a year and has zero corrosion issues. Bravo.

Trap verticals have been around for decades and many use them with success. However, two new designs have achieved some notice and are attempting to eat into the trap vertical market: The 43 Foot Tuner Required Fixed Length antenna and the Variable Length SteppIR BigIR antenna.

During this shootout we will compare a 43 foot antenna with the BigIR one band at a time. The base model for this analysis will use a ground vertical model from Larry Cebik’s NEC model collection which simulates the benefit of a good radial system. The radial lengths will be adjusted for each band and will be identical for both the 43 foot and the BigIR. The 43 foot vertical will, of course, never change height. The BigIR will be “adjusted” in height for minimum SWR at the test frequency. Where the BigIR can be 3/4 wavelengths height that will be calculated too.

HF Band Analysis:

Band	Antennas		Notes
	43 Foot	BigIR
160 m	1/12 wave	n/a	The Top Band is great, but both antennas are woefully short
80 m	1/6 wave	1/8 wave	Having an 80 meter vertical is worth while
60 m	1/4 wave	1/6 wave	Its nice to have a way to use this new band
40 m	1/3 wave	1/4 wave
30 m	4/9 wave	1/4 wave	WARC bands are often the forgotten bands
20 m	5/8 wave	1/4 wave	This is an important DX band
17 m	4/5 wave	1/4 wave	Another good WARC band
15 m	7/8 wave	1/4 and 3/4 wave	We will compare three antennas since the BigIR can tune 15 m two ways
12 m	17/16 wave	1/4 and 3/4 wave	Ready for sun spots
10 m	5/4 wave	1/4 and 3/4 wave	Ready for sun spots
6 m	9/4	1/4 and 3/4 wave	Just for fun

Note, all the above comparisons have the antennas ground mounted, not elevated.

The big 43 foot next to the BigIR set to 10 meters 1/4 wave

We will analyze each band in turn in upcoming posts and link to them from here so bookmark this page now and stay tuned…

If you install a 43 foot vertical in your back yard, route the coax through a switch and handle the tuning inside your ham shack, you need to ensure you do not exceed the voltage or current limits of the relays in the switch.

This issue comes from the expected high SWR on the coax. When there is high SWR on any transmission line you will have points along the line that may be high current or high voltage. Either could exceed the limit of the relay.

The good folks at DX Engineering confirmed my 8 port switch I purchased from them can handle an SWR of about 2:1 at full power. Everything else being the same this limit will climb as power is reduced.

The point is if you are using the tuner in your shack to load up the 43 foot vertical along with its transmission line, that transmission line has high standing waves on it which will cause trouble for anything in its path… like a switch box.

If you insist on tuning the 43 foot antenna in your shack you are well advised to connect it straight to your matcher.

If you are using a switch, as I am, that is in the RF path for the 43 foot vertical, you should seriously consider placing a tuner at the base of the antenna to avoid the high SWR issues on the coax.

Now it is August and I am finally getting around to reviewing the DX Engineering RR8-HP eight port coaxial switch and the controller.

The review will be two articles: initial thoughts, photos and then bench RF testing.

Initial thoughts:

This is one sturdy piece of equipment. It is made of Stainless Steel with a circuit board inside which performs the actual switching function. The electronics is housed in an upside down box with welded edges to make a rain resistant box. The coaxial connectors face down. Details include:

• MOV Protection on each control input
• Real machine screws, not sheet metal screws, used to hold everything together – very nice
• Deep threaded inserts for the machine screws to thread into
• Four spot welds to hold the mounting flange to the box
• The relays appear to be a custom model with “RLY20AHV, SPDT, 20A, 12VDC Coil” imprinted on the side
• Two relays in series for each channel helps with isolation
• Optional shorting of unused channels
• The face plate with the connectors is the ground connection for the shield currents
• Two layers circuit board with thickness of the usual 62 mils
• RF conduction paths on circuit board are about 100 mils wide and are on both the top and bottom of the board to share the currents
• Relay control signal copper width about 1/20″
• Ground plane used on both sides of the board – appears to be used for grounding the unused channels (with optional shorting braid installed) and for the relay coil return current – This provides an opportunity to place 1 MΩ resistors instead if all you care about is static dissipation.
• Vias in the circuit board join the top and bottom ground copper pours – However, some of the vias are not fully attached to the surrounding copper

For some reason DX Engineering does not include schematics in their product manuals like most any other amateur radio product. However, it is not too difficult to figure out. A best guess is included below.

I can say I have never seen a better engineered amateur radio product on this level from any other company. Despite the higher cost of this product, vs. competitors, it is clear to see this is the far better value.