In considering the *total power* radiated by any antenna, you need to look
at the 3-dimensional antenna pattern, not a 2-dimensional slice. The total
radiated power is the 3-dimensional integration of the 3-dimensional
radiation pattern. It is convenient to do this in spherical coordinates
because that is how we visualize 3-dimensional patterns. In spherical
coordinates the integration applies the *smallest* weighting at elevation
angles around zenith. Even if the dipole is low, the calculation shows that
the fraction of power that goes straight up is small compared to the total
radiated power. This is easily understood in 3-dimensional spherical
coordinates:
https://www.khanacademy.org/math/multivariable-calculus/integrating-multivar
iable-functions/triple-integrals-a/a/triple-integrals-in-spherical-coordinat
es.
73, John W1FV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
n4is@n4is.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 6:58 AM
To: jkaufmann@alum.mit.edu; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX
Sorry , but all antenna's on 160m are close to the ground and it is the
case, you can check by yourself using EZENEC if you don't know how to
calculate the fields.
There is no misleading here.
73
JC
N4IS
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of John Kaufmann
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 8:53 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX
The statement that the half of a horizontal dipole's radiation is vertically
polarized is misleading and needs qualification. There is a vertically
polarized component off the ends of the dipole but it is only of consequence
at takeoff angles approaching 90 degrees, in other words straight overhead.
I would argue that these takeoff angles are of little interest for long
distance propagation.
At takeoff angles lower than 60 degrees or so, the total radiation pattern
of a dipole at any reasonable height becomes dominated by the horizontally
polarized component that is broadside to the dipole. The lower the angle
or the higher the dipole, the more insignificant the vertical component
becomes. This is all verifiable in EZNEC. If this were not true, you would
not see the well-defined radiation patterns that are produced by HF Yagi's
at higher frequencies were the radiation is horizontally polarized for
virtually all signals of interest.
73, John W1FV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
n4is@n4is.com
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 11:06 AM
To: 'Roger Kennedy'; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX
Roger
Every dipole or inverted V irradiate 50% of the power horizontal polarized
broadside with the wire and 50% of the power vertical polarized along the
wire. After the first refraction it does not matter.
This is an electro-magnetic wave law. You can check that on EZENEC, it is
not a anecdote.
The advantage over vertical 1/4 wave antenna is efficiency. The vertical
efficiency depends on the ground plane resistance, it is common to see
invert L with only 50 % irradiated power, the other 50% is dissipated on the
ground.
"In Theory, we know everything, but nothing works"
"In Practice, everything works, but we don't know why"
We never will fully understand the 160m band.
73's
JC
N4IS
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|