On Sep 24, 7:16 pm, "Jimmie D" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...

On 23 Sep, 07:29, "Jimmie D" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

On 22 Sep, 07:22, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote

The most efficient radiator is one wave length long where
it is considered to be in equilibrium with a parallel electrical
cuircuit.
For most efficient radiation both the capacitance and the
inductance must act as a energy storage such that when
the terminals are shorted the energy is released in a burst
such that radiation can begin. ... In the case of a fractional
wave length radiator the pendulum type radiation is not
available for radiation

___________

Note (for one example of many) that in an antenna system consisting of
a
1/2-wave, center-fed dipole driven by a matched, balanced transmission
line,
the dipole itself radiates virtually all of the r-f energy present at
the
antenna feedpoint.

The radiation efficiency of a system as in the above example, but
using a
full wave dipole is no better than the 1/2-wave version, other things
equal.
The full wave version just has a different radiation pattern.

RF

I don't know what your credentials are for you to make such a
statement but it is a free world after all!
A quad radiator is a wave length radiator with a gain more than a half
wave as one sample.
Computor programing confirmes more radiation from full wave antennas
and mathematics according to Maxwell,s rules substantiate it. I can
understand not believing computor programs but I am very interested in
any mathematical data that would support your stand which is contrary
to the mathematics that I and others support.
What you are stating is that an attena in a series cuircit format
produces the same radiation as a parallel or tank cuircuit. I am more
than eager to read the contrary mathematical proof that is contrary to
the mathematics that I hold true. You may have hit on the true
explaqnation of radiation which Einstein, Planck and many others went
to their grave without solving it
Regards
Art KB9MZ.....XG

I dont know his credentials either but Richard is absolutly correct.
Efficency is the ability to radiate the signal and not turn it into
infra-red energy and has nothing to do with gain.

The Math:
Efficiency = (power applied to the antenna system - power turned into
heat
by the antenna system)/power applied to the antenna system.

Doesnt take a computer, doesnt take Maxwell or Einstien to explain. 5th
grade math works pretty well in this case.

The best thing the OP can do for his existing antenna is install a good
ground system and impedance matching networks, antenna tuner. If I were
really serious about it I would invest in an antenna analyzer so I would
know when my antenna is tuned for optimum match to my radio and log the
settings of my tuner. With the ground system and antenna type he has I am
sure the ground resistance is soaking up most of his signal. He would
surely
benifit from improving his ground system.

Jimmie- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In comparing two antennas with similar omni direction radiation field
I state that gain in the field is indicative of increased radiadion
but that is a side issue brought up as often is in this newsgroup in
tha absence of a point by point debate.

No that is the point. An antenna can radiate no more energy than you put
into it. If you do something to increase the field intensity in one
direction the field intensity must decrease in other directions. Nothing to
debate, it is a proven fact. A fact you will never accept because if you do
you will also have to accept the your guassian antenna is just a delusion.


If you look at the field of a antenna that isr radiating an equal
amount in all direction
the volume of the radiation consists of usefull energy in the form of
radiation.
If another antenna with the same energy input provides a radiation
field in all
directions that is equal but at a larger radius than the prior antenna
field the the latter antenna has gain
over the prior antenna.
If you compare any fractional ground mounted antenna with a full wave
antenna the radius of the field
willhave a difference of aprox 3 db and the resistive impedance will
have a ratio of two to one.Note that gain is a measure of one radiator
level against another and is no way a distorted field of radiation
that has been manipulated by an additional near by radiator.
A ground plane does nothing more than balancing the circuit provided
such that current does not meander back thru the feed line and a
ground plane is only necessary for a fractional wavelength circuit to
balance the circuit as a whole. It eats up energy that would normally
provide radiation in a circuit such as a full wave radiator. Without a
good ground plane the impedance to a fractional wave length is
difficult and usually not efficient and a lot less than that of a
radiator that does have a good ground plane which is around30 ohms
resistive which is 1/2 of the resistive impedance of a full wave
radiator.
As far as the Gaussian antenna it is not an illusion to those with an
engineering background.
For those without an engineering background to enable them to follow
the logic do not have
the know how to discredit anything and certainly can not measure the
quality of life of those
with understanding.
If you cannot follow the science of antennas then you are doomed to
be a follower, never a leader.
and certainly not a judge.
I'm gone for a month or so and will not be using this newsgroup during
that time.
Will be back in the fall

Art


It is a real shame that you have chosen a knowledge of antennas to be such
an important measuring stick for the value of your existence.

Jimmie

Jimmie