"John"  wrote in message 
... 
 
 "Richard Harrison"  wrote in message 
 ... 
  John wrote: 
  "I`ll go back and try again." 
  
  John has the best help there is in Roy Lewallen, the creator of EZNEC. 
 
 
 I agree wholeheartedly. 
 
 
  The idea of breaking the behavior of a folded dipole or unipole into its 
  differential (transmission line)-mode and common (antenna)-mode 
  behaviors goes back  according to Paul H. Lee in "The Amateur Radio 
  Vertical Antenna Handbook" to W.V. Roberts, "Input Impedance of a Folded 
  Dipole", RCA Review, Vol.8, No.2, June 1947, p. 289. 
  
  Around the 1/4-wave length, the folded monopole`s resistance is steadily 
  rising with frequency. High radiation resistance as compared with loss 
  is good. This happens with the open-circuit 1/4-wave vertical too. 
 
 
 This is what I'm trying to see using EZNEC. I agree with the resistance 
 trend, but I keep seeing capacitive reactance below 1/4-wave resonance and 
 inductive reactance above 1/4-wave resonance. 
 
John, 
For a 1/4 wave folded monopole working above a ground plane, you have to go 
below the frequency where the monopole is 1/8 wavelength before it goes 
inductive. For a folded DIPOLE it is 1/4 wavelength. You are already doing 
EZNEC, spend another 3 minutes with it. 
 
Tam/WB2TT 
 
  Around the 1/4-wave length, the folded monopole undergoes an abrupt 
  change from inductive reactance when it is too short for resonance to 
  capacitive reactance when it is too long for resonance. The open-circuit 
  whip undergoes a similar change but it has a capacitive reactance when 
  it is too short for resonance and an inductive reactance when it is too 
  long for resonance.. 
 
 
 I see no difference in the trends. 
 
 
  One contributor to this folded monopole thread said he found a coil 
  shunted across the feedpoint of an Andrew Corporation folded monopole. 
  On page 26-12 of my 19th edition of the "ARRL Antenna Book" is described 
  a matching technique using such a coil. It`s called the "helical 
  hairpin" (with tongue in cheek). This method seems convenient, in 
  conjunction with length adjustment of the folded monopole, to get a 50 + 
  j0 impedance at the specified operating frequency. I am not privy to 
  Andrew`s actual practice as we just placed the orders and the antennas 
  worked as advertised. 
  
  Figure 17 on page 6-9 of my 19th edition of the "ARRL Antenna Book" is 
  very similar in appearance to the Andrew Corporation folded monopole. 
  There is a lot of good information in the Antenna Book on folded 
  antennas, and more. 
  
  Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI 
 
 
 My copy of the book is the 18th edition. 
 
 John 
 
 
 
 
		 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	 |