I sure disagree about being able to determine an antenna's efficiency by
either resistance measurements or by measuring received signa;l strength at
any one point in space.

From practical, engineer's point of view, and we are looking at shortened
(loaded) antennas, you (or at least I) want to know how efficient the loaded
antenna is vs. equivalent (same pattern producing) antenna. You want to compare
oranges with oranges. The ultimate indicator is how much is one better (worst)
than the other producing more (less) transmit (or receive) signal. That is the
ultimate parameter that we are looking for, that's what you want to measure and
compare. We have dB as a unit for that. 3dB means you gain (lose) double
(power) signal. If you lose 50% in the heat, you will see corresponding loss in
signal strength. So forget the igloo!


But, you are certainly a much smarter fuy than I
ever was. So, I am not equipped to get into a news group contest.

How did you arrive at that without putting me in the styrofoam igloo, or that I
am Fuy? :-)

It is my contention that the antenna under test's complete radiation
pattern and field strength would have to be measured and integrated if
field strength is used to determine it's efficiency. That could get
coplicated.

NOT! That's why you want to use the same pattern producing antennas for
comparison (apples to apples) i.e. quarter wave (electrical) shortened (loaded)
vertical vs. full size quarter wave vertical made of same material (tubing).
You can make measurements at the same point (properly chosen) and compare
signal levels while swapping the antennas at the same test site.

It would have seemed to me that the loss in any "R" is dependent on the
current flowing in it. And, I'd be concerned that any resonances could have
higher circulating currents at the operating frequency.


Circulating in what?

If you can point out the errors in my convictions, I'd like to read about
where I'm wrong.


You can be "convicted" in anything you like. But you have to look at the
problems and see what are you trying to achieve. I always try to make antenna
to produce the maximum signal in the desired direction, pattern. That's what
you try to measure, evaluate. Anything else is just contributing factor that
gets included in the final parameter - signal strength. You can fart with heat,
resistances, etc., I do not use antennas for heating, I use them for producing
or extracting signals and that's what I am interested in and want to quantify.
You need proper "standard" and use proper parameters to compare your "miracle"
against.

If Mr. Vincent "discovers" that his shortened antenna is more broadband than
full size (same electrical length) radiator, than he has some serious resistors
"broadening" the response. My dummy load is perfect broadband "antenna" and
almost 100% "efficient" - turns almost 100% of power into a heat, but radiates
almost nothing.

The point is, you can measure other things like heat generated by the loses,
but you are neglecting other parameters that come to play, leading you astray,
while neglecting the most important parameter - the result you are (or I am)
after - the signal strength!
Does that "convict" you? Otherwise I rest my case.
Jerry


Yuri, K3BU.us