Cecil:
Yes Cecil, there is wisdom in your words...
However, as I pointed out, I am now focusing on "received signal", its'
quality and strength.
After having given it some thought, that is what is most important. In an
grave emergency I have the ability to bring multiple kilowatts on line (yes,
I have the generator to support it.) What I can't do is guarantee that for
the fellow at the other end of the contact. So, I am focusing my attention
towards his/her benefit--in the refinement of my ability to pull
sub-nano-watts from the ether...
EZNEC and all other calculations are great, I appreciate what can get me to
ballpark figures with matching, lengths, spacings, predictions, etc.
But, in the end, the humble s-meter on a known transceiver, compared against
know signals and similar conditions will be my final guide and the
determining factor.
To all which point out I "may only be"/am duplicating past work, while
making futile attempts, or expelling great amounts of energy in this
pursuit, I say: "It keeps me out of the bars and away from the wild women!"
(saves on my Jim Beam/Viagra bill too!)
Warmest regards,
John
--
I would like to point out, I do appreciate the "Been there--done that!"
posts. Indeed, now your observations, comments and discourse should be
filled with wisdom--I am listening!!!
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Cecil Moore wrote:
I knew I was confused about what you were trying to do.
John, I just realized what is wrong with gamma feeding a
1/2WL vertical at the base. The currents in each side of
the gamma feed section are pretty much out-of-phase so
they don't radiate (much). Conclusion: Gamma feeding a
1/2WL antenna at the base results in a field strength
comparable to a 1/4WL vertical and the minuscule amount
of gain is not worth the effort. Antenna gurus probably
already knew that but it just dawned on my concrete brain.
In much the same way a Zepp or a J-Pole is not a 3/4WL
radiator even though they are 3/4WL long, a gamma match
on a base-fed 1/2WL vertical doesn't yield a 1/2WL
electrical radiator. For this reason, the length of a
gamma match should be considerably less than a wavelength.
A good rule of thumb is probably in the ballpark of less
than ~6% of a wavelength. Your idea seems to require about
16% of a wavelength.
Moral: Physical length and RF electrical length are not
always the same.
What you are trying to do apparently requires a J-Pole
or Zepp approach, i.e. a physical 3/4WL antenna.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----