If it would be just that there is I giant steel high bay warehouse right in the way, I am currently getting the best signal pointing the antenna about 24° North, so I think it is picking up some sort of reflections.
I am totally shure.
It is accually outside.
Got it working quite well now with the 85,5cm antenna, but many of the other stations at the higher frequencies don't work that well anymore :/
Could it be a problem that I build the new antenna out of steel instead of copper?
Could it be a problem that I build the new antenna out of steel instead of copper?
You want a good conductor, so copper is the best practical choice, followed by the less expensive aluminium (which most aerials are made from).
I read that the quality of reception is heavily compromised if you use iron (steel).
I read that the quality of reception is heavily compromised if you use iron (steel).
Try to maintain the antenna free of metal surcaces external to the aerial itself as far as possible, perhaps 2xLambda.
Do you have a plain surface of metal say Lambda/2 horizontal, for example a zinc roof, a water tank, etc?.
Do you have a plain surface of metal say Lambda/2 horizontal, for example a zinc roof, a water tank, etc?.
From https://pa0fri.home.xs4all.nl/Ant/Quad/quadeng.htm
QQ here means cubical quad, the type of antenna we're dealing with here. The feedpoint is where the coax connects to the antenna.
If that matches the frequency of the station you're most interested in, then I'd say go for it. When I built mine I was aiming for 96.2 MHz. The antenna is calculated for maximum efficiency at 98 MHz as that is the middle of the FM band. So in my case it all matched up fine.
When designing for 89.6 you'll have progressively less gain with higher frequencies.
You could also try a cable TV signal amplifier between the antenna and the receiver, should you have one laying around. It's not exactly great engineering, but if it works, it can't be that stupid ;-)
You could try and compare with a loop made out of speaker wire. That's what I used for my first tests.
Note also that the greater the diameter of the aerial elements, the greater the bandwidth of the aerial, enabling it to pick up a wider range of broadcast frequencies. I presume this applies to a cubical quad as much as it does to a half-wave dipole.
Yep, that's the logic behind my other favourite 'from scraps' antenna: the beer can dipole!
https://voorzitte8.wixsite.com/pi4zlb/experiment-met-een-bierblik-antenne-voor
(Schematic and spectrum analyser screenshot at the bottom of the page)
Two 330ml beer cans spaced about 15mm apart will cover the entire digital terrestrial TV band (400-800MHz) in most of Europe.
Using bigger 500ml cans is said to work very well for digital radio, but I have yet to try that out.
