Radio Telescope Building Guide for Beginners

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around building a radio telescope, specifically focusing on creating a setup that can produce images rather than just graphs. Participants share their experiences, recommendations, and considerations for beginners in radio astronomy, including budget constraints, equipment choices, and types of antennas.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a desire for a guide to build a radio telescope capable of producing images, seeking advice as a beginner.
  • Another participant suggests starting with graph data, indicating that building a telescope is complex and potentially costly.
  • Several participants emphasize the importance of determining budget, specific objects of interest, and the type of equipment needed, such as antennas or dishes.
  • Specific frequency ranges for observing different celestial phenomena are discussed, including atmospheric whistlers, solar flares, and Jupiter noise.
  • One participant mentions that a budget of $200 may be challenging but not impossible, suggesting second-hand equipment options.
  • There is a recommendation for using a wire antenna for observing the sun and Jupiter, with suggestions for specific types of antennas like dipole and multi-turn loop antennas.
  • Participants discuss the need for additional equipment, such as a data logger or chart recorder, to visualize signals.
  • Confusion arises regarding the necessity of a dish versus an antenna, with differing opinions on their applications and effectiveness for the intended observations.
  • One participant highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between antenna size and resolution, explaining the differences in performance between dish antennas and Yagi antennas.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether a dish or an antenna is more suitable for the beginner's radio telescope project. There are multiple competing views regarding the best approach and equipment needed.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the complexity of building a radio telescope increases with frequency, and that realistic expectations should be set regarding the capabilities of the equipment available within budget constraints.

Who May Find This Useful

Beginners interested in radio astronomy, amateur radio operators, and those looking to build their own radio telescope setups may find this discussion beneficial.

jamalkoiyess
Messages
217
Reaction score
22
Hello PF,
I was wondering if there is any good guide to build a radio telescope that can give me an image not just a graph. I am just a starter so any advice or tips are relly appreciated.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
an image is build up from lots of graph data sets
go for the graph style for a start, that is going to keep you extremely busy and poor building it
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jamalkoiyess
firstly you need to decide

1) budget
2) what specific object(s) you want to observe ... different ones have different frequencies
3) depending on the answer to #2, that will determine if you will need a dish and low noise amplifiers
or a wire antenna or maybe Yagi antenna(s)

Eg
atmospheric whistlers can be received on 10 - 20 kHz (ELF - VLF)
solar flares from the sun can be received from around 1MHz to 50 MHz (HF to VHF)
Jupiter noise on around 18 - 24 MHz ( HF)

any deep space objects are going to require lots of ground space for BIG antennas and decent money for
low noise receivers etcDave
 
davenn said:
firstly you need to decide

1) budget
2) what specific object(s) you want to observe ... different ones have different frequencies
3) depending on the answer to #2, that will determine if you will need a dish and low noise amplifiers
or a wire antenna or maybe Yagi antenna(s)

Eg
atmospheric whistlers can be received on 10 - 20 kHz (ELF - VLF)
solar flares from the sun can be received from around 1MHz to 50 MHz (HF to VHF)
Jupiter noise on around 18 - 24 MHz ( HF)

any deep space objects are going to require lots of ground space for BIG antennas and decent money for
low noise receivers etcDave

I am new to this field so my budget is not more than 200$. I will not take more risk for something i don't know.
For the objects i would go for solar flares and the Jupiter noise ... sounds more interesting. So any good setup ?
 
jamalkoiyess said:
I am new to this field so my budget is not more than 200$. I will not take more risk for something i don't know.
For the objects i would go for solar flares and the Jupiter noise ... sounds more interesting. So any good setup ?

OK $200 is going to be a little difficult but not impossible

a "shortwave" HF ( high frequency) receiver that covers say 1MHz to 30MHz ... shop around
you may find something second hand for $200 that has respectable receive
an old Yaesu FRG7000, a bit pricier a FRG7700 or a Kenwood R1000

all three of these are 20++ yrs old you won't get anything better unless you are willing to spend lots more
you will still need to get an either an old pen chart recorder and lots of paper or a digitiser ( datalogger) for a computer
eg a picoscope logger https://www.picotech.com/products/data-logger

this is just one brand, there are many others out there, they all come with the driver software for displaying the signal

then you need to get wire etc for making an antenna ... that's almost the cheapest part :wink:

you are probably not going to get much change out of $500 - 700

.

Dave
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jamalkoiyess
davenn said:
OK $200 is going to be a little difficult but not impossible

a "shortwave" HF ( high frequency) receiver that covers say 1MHz to 30MHz ... shop around
you may find something second hand for $200 that has respectable receive
an old Yaesu FRG7000, a bit pricier a FRG7700 or a Kenwood R1000

all three of these are 20++ yrs old you won't get anything better unless you are willing to spend lots more
you will still need to get an either an old pen chart recorder and lots of paper or a digitiser ( datalogger) for a computer
eg a picoscope logger https://www.picotech.com/products/data-logger

this is just one brand, there are many others out there, they all come with the driver software for displaying the signal

then you need to get wire etc for making an antenna ... that's almost the cheapest part :wink:

you are probably not going to get much change out of $500 - 700

.

Dave

But do i need a dish or an antenna ?
I am building it on my own so if you could help me and list the parts that would be a huge thanks for you.
 
jamalkoiyess said:
But do i need a dish or an antenna ?

for the sun, Earth atmospherics or Jupiter, just a wire antenna
sun and Jupiter a dipole antenna tuned to around 20 MHz
for Earth atmospherics a large multi-turn loop antenna

jamalkoiyess said:
I am building it on my own so if you could help me and list the parts that would be a huge thanks for you.

you should be seeking out the help of a local amateur (ham) radio operator for some hands on mentoring and guidance
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jamalkoiyess
davenn said:
you should be seeking out the help of a local amateur (ham) radio operator for some hands on mentoring and guidance

Yeah i can get help from a friend in my area who has a masters in electronic physics and works as an electrician so he has the experience.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn
  • #11
jamalkoiyess said:
This site suggested a dish however davenn said i should use an antenna ... i am confused [emoji28]

don't be confused :smile:
the wire dipole and or yagi antennas are for HF and VHF ... 1 MHz - 30 MHz ( HF), (30 - 300MHz VHF)

dish antennas are for low band to high band microwave frequencies 1 GHz and up

for you at this time for the least money outlay you need to do as I suggested back in posts # 5 and #7

THEN ONCE you have mastered some of the basics, and started recording signals and still have the interest, then you can start looking at reception in the microwave bands

basically ... learn to crawl before you learn to walk or run :wink:
As you move higher and higher in frequency, things get more difficult and more care needs to be taken in construction etcDave
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jamalkoiyess
  • #12
Just for fun, check out this website:

http://www.fairradio.com/

Lots of radio related surplus and unusual parts... Lots of once very costly and amazingly overengeneered military surplus radio and antenna gear. Never know what you are going to find, and HF range stuff is often in abundance. No affiliation, just occasional customer. YMMV.

Funky retail shop in Lima, OH as well. A fun visit if in the neighborhood.

diogenesNY
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jamalkoiyess
  • #13
jamalkoiyess said:
This site suggested a dish however davenn said i should use an antenna ... i am confused [emoji28]
You need to take into account that the resolution (beam width) of an antenna is related to how wide it is (the aperture). A dish antenna has a well defined aperture as long as it is several wavelengths in diameter. The effective aperture of a Yagi antenna is fairly small and it is normal to just plot a rough pattern or use manufacturer's figures for the sensitivity pattern (so called Radiation Pattern). You can get much better directivity for shorter wavelength signals. If you are receiving (round figures, here) signals with a frequency of 3GHz, the wavelength is 1cm and the beam width of a 1m dish would be round about 0.5° if everything is done right. That would give a pretty glubby image and would not separate distinct sources which are closer together than 0.5°. A yagi antenna, looking at a VHF signal, would have a beam width of more like 20 or 30° Plotting a graph of signal level as you sweep the antenna is the best you can hope for until you have assembled a sophisticated system to produce 2D 'images'. There is no equivalent of a photo sensor array as in an optical telescope, to give you 'pictures' directly of the RF signals arriving on Earth.
For radioastronomy imaging, it is necessary to find 'quiet' frequency bands where there few man-made signals because it is very hard to reject them using the directivity of any array that you are likely to be able to afford. You have to pitch your expectations at a realistic level but it would be pretty rewarding to identify a source of RF signals in space. There are other things you can do with signals from space. This link describes the reception of reflected VHF transmissions by a meteor shower - no particular directivity is needed for this and the picture shows a fairly low gain yagi antenna.
I agree with Dave about looking for surplus equipment. You do, of course, need some DIY ability with RF electronics if you want to get cheap elderly stuff operating properly. A good learning process, though.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn and jamalkoiyess

Similar threads

  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
7K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
14K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K