[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] If you had a choice

To: Stan Stockton <>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] If you had a choice
From: Jim Lux <>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 06:01:43 -0700
List-post: <">>
On 10/17/12 2:38 AM, Stan Stockton wrote:
Perhaps a much more practical and objective evaluation would be to
have someone who has the proper equipment and knowledge of its use to
spend the time to determine the exact properties of any loading
components involved (if any) and then create accurate models.

yes.. but there are a significant number of hams who do not believe that modeling works (particularly for loading components), and, realistically, a well done test also addresses things like construction and assembly tolerances.

When I bought my 6BTVs, I wanted to build a model that would match their measured (impedance) performance, particularly with respect to mutual coupling in an array, so I started out trying to figure out how to model the traps, that led to a challenge of trying to *measure* those traps. I never did find a good solution.

One could, if one knew the details of construction, probably build a full wave very fine scale model in something like HFSS, but that gets back to the construction tolerances issue.

For that matter, as much as we'd like manufacturers to provide validated NEC4 models for their products, I'll note that when we buy antennas commercially, they don't generally come with a model, they come with pattern data.

That said, I've been wondering if there is a way to do some sort of near field measurement for an HF antenna using a probe/source suspended on (non-conductive) cables.

TowerTalk mailing list

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