Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] 80M Delta Loop

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 80M Delta Loop
From: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 06:34:43 -0700
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Jim,

Here is an NCJ article where Tom N6BT discusses the results of his drone measurements:

   https://ncjweb.com/features/mayjun19feat.pdf


In the article, Shiller alludes to energy at low angles being depleted over distance and the connection between the surface-wave (ground wave) radiation and attenuation of the low-angle sky-wave radiation:

   "Energy in the lowest angles from a vertical antenna over ground
   (assuming flat terrain) will be depleted by the ground as the energy
   extends from the antenna for a particular distance. If this distance
   is not limited, the NEC2 model calculates the resulting take-off
   angle at an infinite distance. Earth’s surface, of course, is not
   infinite, so the energy will be depleted over a distance that’s much
   less than infinity. What might a realistic boundary be for the limit
   of this energy depletion? A suggestion during conversations on this
   subject led to considering that it might be when the surface wave
   (ground wave) ends. In our empirical testing, we have seen this wave
   over basically flat ground and noted it on drawings as “the spike.”
   On one occasion, we were able to measure at a distance far enough
   that we did not see the spike."


In this article on the psuedo-Brewster angle and vertical antenna pattern formation,  Bob Zavrel W7SX makes a similar connection:

   http://www.arrl.org/files/file/QEX_Next_Issue/2016/March-April2016/Zavrel.pdf

   "Notice that the E-field amplitude at low angles is simply
   attenuated faster than in free space, unlike the nearly
   discontinuous function the NEC models imply. Of course in the very
   far field, the NEC pattern becomes a good approximation, but the
   assumption of phase cancellation appears incorrect. The more
   advanced versions of EZNEC do permit modeling of the ground wave,
   but only at designated distances."


   "The Figure 7 simulation is the same as in Figure 6, except the
   ground surface field plot is removed to reveal the E-field
   underground. It appears from this simulation that the
   pseudo-Brewster angle—actually its counterpart — is formed by the
   attenuation of the ground-surface wave. As the radiation angle
   increases, its distance to the ground increases faster for a given
   distance from the antenna. In other words as an E-field propagates
   tangentially to a lossy dielectric, it is attenuated greater than in
   free space."

I've often wondered about the connection between ground-wave and low-angle sky-wave from a vertical antenna. These two articles seem to hint at the relationship.

73, Mike W4EF.................




On 7/24/2024 12:41 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
On 7/24/2024 11:31 AM, kq2m@kq2m.com wrote:
> One antenna that does work well even over poor ground is a 4-square with elevated radials, preferably above .05 wavelength in height.

Poor soil degrades the efficiency of vertically polarized antennas both under the antenna AND in the far field, where the ground reflection that reinforces the direct wave is created. Radial systems affect ONLY what happens under the radials -- they screen the direct field of the antenna from the lossy earth, and give the antenna a low resistance path for its return current. That's ALL that they do. They cannot compensate for lossy ground in the far field.

But ground characteristics DO vary with location, even with lousy ground under the antenna, good ground in the far field can support the needed reflection, making the antenna work well. That's the classic case of a vertical near salt water. And N6BT, well-known for his "Team Vertical" setups, has recently done field measurements with a drone to show that a vertical very close to a drop-off (his testing was on a mesa in AZ) produces a very strong signal in the direction of the dropoff. He first showed this work as part of the Pacificon Antenna Forum about five years ago, to which we both often contributed.

73, Jim K9YC

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>