[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Petrezewski (sp?) array ..

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Petrezewski (sp?) array ..
From: (Pete Smith)
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 20:28:54 -0400
At 02:10 PM 4/6/01 -0700, John Kaufmann wrote:

>This is a very good point that is often forgotten when using open or
short-circuited coaxial stubs as reactive elements.  These stubs operate
with infinite SWR and as a result, the line losses are MUCH higher than
they would be for a line with 1:1 SWR.  The net result is that the
impedance presented by the stub back to the antenna can contain a large
series resistive component.  The ARRL Antenna Handbook contains a section
which discusses how to use the Smith Chart to calculate the amount of
resistance with a lossy line.  When you plug this resistance into an
antenna modeling program, you might be surprised how much it can degrade
the gain of a parasitic array.

Both K3LR's article (8/94 QST) and my own modeling take note of this
phenomenon.  Initially, we tried using lossless NEC-2 transmission lines to
provide the loading, which modeled to provide excellent gain and mediocre
F/B.  Substituting loads calculated with TLA as the equivalent to ~150
degrees of RG-8X reduced the gain somewhat, but also produced much-improved
F/B ratio, particularly well above the resonant frequency of the dipoles.  

The latter phenomenon has me wondering -- perhaps ~150 degrees length of
coax doesn't load the reflector dipoles enough for optimum F/B at the
resonance of the driven dipole, but the added coax length required to
optimize the reflectors imposes too much additional loss.

73, Pete N4ZR
Contesting is!

The World Contest Station Database 
is waiting for your input at 

List Sponsor: - Trylon self-supporting towers, safety
equipment, rigging gear, LOOS tension guages & more!

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

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