Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorter versions??

To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorter versions??
From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Reply-to: jim@audiosystemsgroup.com
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2013 09:02:38 -0700
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
On 9/7/2013 6:59 PM, Tom W8JI wrote:
This would also apply to an extended double zepp, where the second antenna half makes the image unnecessary. Each half of the double zepp is the image of the other side, so we don't need earth.

False premise alert. There are two different mechanisms involved. One is the pattern distortion (gain) in the horizontal plane produced by current distribution on the double zepp, and amounts to a couple of dB but a narrower pattern as compared to a dipole. But the earth reflection is still there, because it's a horizontal antenna at some height above earth.

A few additional fundamental concept helps understand some of this.

1) Current distribution in antennas is determined by where the open circuit is -- that is, current MUST be near zero at the end, will be at a maximum a quarter wave along the wire (if the wire is long enough), and will be near zero again a half wave along the wire, if the wire is long enough.

2) As Tom has noted, radiation is produced by current, and the vertical pattern is formed by how that radiation interacts with the earth at a distance from the antenna.

3) N6BV and I have been doing some modeling of simple quarter wave monopoles (what we would call a "ground plane" antenna) and half wave dipoles at various heights above ground, and comparing the patterns with the same antennas with their base at ground level, with a good radial field. We've done this for a rather varied set of ground conditions. The premise is, "If I could mount my multi-band HF vertical on my roof, should I?" We specifically looked at 40M - 10M. For 40M, we looked at 30 ft and 45 ft mounting heights, and for 20-10, modeled at 20 ft and 33 ft.

4) The executive summary is that raising an antenna above ground by 1/8 wavelength to 1/4 wavelength is nearly always beneficial, provided that, if it's an antenna that needs radials, at least four radials are provided, the advantage of roof-mounting varies from about 1-2dB for very good soil to 6-7 dB for really lousy soil. "Works better" was defined by more radiation at low angles (below about 20 degrees).

5) The higher mounting location "works better" both because near field ground losses are reduced, and because the high current part of the antenna is higher.

6) Sea water is an exception -- lobes (peaks and nulls in the vertical pattern) begin developing with even small elevation of mounting height, and lower is better.

7) While half wave verticals work without radials, a radial field under a half wave vertical dipole with its base just above ground, not connected to the antenna, increases field strength by a dB or so.

73, Jim K9YC
_________________
Topband Reflector

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