On 6/10/20 6:44 PM, Dan Maguire wrote:
John Simmons wrote:
I noted that your two links are modeled using NEC2. Let's see the results using
NEC4.
See https://i.imgur.com/aXqmRJm.png
As Jim Lux mentioned there is a slight difference in the calculated
feedpoint impedance at resonance (jX=0) but the Gain (dBi) values are
almost identical.
Also see this follow-up to the qrz forum post referenced earlier:
https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/single-ground-radial-wire-placed-beneath-a-dipole-how-effective-is-it.709471/page-10#post-5500865
And this is a subtle details that only an antenna metrologist would be
concerned with.
When you have a series of plots, is it the *same antenna* at various
heights? Or has the antenna length been adjusted for resonance at the
same frequency at each height?
Or in practical terms, if you have a tuner or matching network that is
readjusted.
If you were doing A/B testing those kinds of things might make a
difference, but then you have to get into stuff like the tuner's
resolution, whether the transmitter exhibits any "load pull" behavior
(the output impedance varies with the connected load and/or output
power). As well as a host of other factors that you need to at least
"know" to reduce the measurement uncertainty.
I think one of the take homes is "there is a best height" and "if you
can't put the antenna at the "best height" it will still work.
It has to be pretty low before it's "horrible" (i.e. more than 10 dB
down from "best height")
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|
