[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] NEC, ground, grounds, and radials.

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] NEC, ground, grounds, and radials.
From: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 12:48:14 +0000
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>

I can understand that the interpretation of dBi which appears in most 
engineering texts (and possibly the IEEE definition?) throws up 
conundrums with which you are uncomfortable. But what I think is unfair 
is to claim that EZNEC is in error, simply because it adopts the 
"industry standard" interpretation rather than an alternative that you 
might prefer.

I make widespread use of EZNEC, and when I saw someone as authoritative 
as yourself state that it is 3dB in error I felt it needed further 

Steve G3TXQ

On 08/01/2011 00:20, Dr. Gerald N. Johnson wrote:
> My conundrum is that I expect equal power intensity at the the measuring
> point from the isotropic source whether a ground plane is involved or
> not and that I also expect equal intensity from a vertical dipole in
> free space and a quarter wave vertical on the ground plane (except for
> the ground absorption at the real ground plane).
TenTec mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>