"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...
1.8 m -- Radial Z = 70.17 - j 24.1
1.9 m -- Radial Z = 68.5 - j 19.0
2.0 m -- Radial Z = 67.2 - j 14.2
2.1 m -- Radial Z = 66.2 - j 9.5
2.2 m -- Radial Z = 65.5 - j 5.0
2.3 m -- Radial Z = 65.1 - j 0.6
2.4 m -- Radial Z = 65.0 + j 3.6
2.5 m -- Radial Z = 65.2 + j 7.8
2.6 m -- Radial Z = 65.6 + j 11.7

I can keep going if you think that these are the results
you expected. I am tempted to continue, in steps of
0.1 m, and plotting the results on the Smith Chart.
I expect the data to rapidly spiral to the center of
a chart normalized at 101. 6 ohms.

Frank
======================================
Frank,

Very interesting!

I am plotting graphs of R and jX versus length of radial.

Joining up the dots I expect to see shallow sinewaves superimposed on
fairly level mean values.

At present there is a definite shape of curve appearing in the
reactance values while the resistance values are still fairly level.

As length increases I expect to see something similar happening to the
resistance curve which seems to be in between peaks and troughs.

From now on it seems safe for you to increase length in increments of
0.2 metres. There is no danger of missing peaks and troughs in the
curves.

Please keep up the good work.
----
Reg

1.8 m -- Radial Z = , I have reached 7.4m, but there does not seem
any point in continuing. Let me know what you think. It does not
appear to be behaving as I would expect of a transmission line;
but then I have no experience of transmission lines immersed
in a lossy material.

Also note the jump in impedance at 5.6 m. I double checked the
result, and it appears to be correct.

2.8 m -- Radial Z = 67.5 + j 19.2
3.0 m -- Radial Z = 70.6 + j 25.9
3.2 m -- Radial Z = 74.7 + j 31.6
3.4 m -- Radial Z = 79.8 + j 36.0
3.6 m -- Radial Z = 85.5 + j 39.0
3.8 m -- Radial Z = 91.4 + j 40.4
4.0 m -- Radial Z = 97.1 + j 40.2
4.2 m -- Radial Z = 102.0 + j 38.6
4.4 m -- Radial Z = 105.9 + j 35.9
4.6 m -- Radial Z = 108.6 + j 32.7
4.8 m -- Radial Z = 110.1 + j 29.3
5.0 m -- Radial Z = 110.5 + j 26.1
5.2 m -- Radial Z = 110.1 + j 23.3
5.4 m -- Radial Z = 109.2 + j 17.2
5.6 m -- Radial Z = 107.9 + j 19.5
5.8 m -- Radial Z = 106.5 + j 18.4
6.0 m -- Radial Z = 105.1 + j 17.7
6.2 m -- Radial Z = 103.8 + j 17.5
6.4 m -- Radial Z = 102.7 + j 17.6
6.6 m -- Radial Z = 101.7 + j 17.9
6.8 m -- Radial Z = 101.0 + j 18.4
7.0 m -- Radial Z = 100.5 + j 19.0
7.2 m -- Radial Z = 100.2 + j 19.6
7.4 m -- Radial Z = 100.1 + j 20.2
..
..
8.0 m -- Radial Z = 100.5 + j 21.4
..
..
9.0 m -- Radial Z = 101.8 + j 21.7

These data are so close to the center of a Smith Chart
normalized to 101.6 + j 21. Not sure how you
normalize with a complex number, but assume it is
with the magnitude of Z.

Frank