RadioBanter - View Single Post

Wimpie[_2_] · April 3rd 14, 07:31 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna

El 03-04-14 18:41, escribió:
wrote:
El 02-04-14 22:32, escribió:
wrote:
El 02-04-14 20:25, Ian Jackson escribió:
In ,
writes
Ian wrote:
In ,

writes

The ideal radial length for ANY ground plane antenna is slightly
longer
than 1/4 wavelength, no matter for what frequencey.

Why is this? I would have thought that a 1/4 wave would be best, as it
offers the lowest impedance.

First you have to define what "best" means.

Yebbut ........
You've just said "the ideal radial length for ANY ground plane antenna
is slightly longer than 1/4 wavelength, no matter for what frequency".
I assumed that "ideal" = "best".
.
All antennas are a trade off for impedance, bandwidth, gain and in most
cases physical ability to build the structure.

Changing the radial length will have a small effect on impdedance
and resonant
point but changing the radial angle will have a bigger effect on
impedance
and a very small effect on resonant point.

True - but what's the angle of the radials got to do with their length?

I would suggest downloading the demo version of EZNEC and modeling a
GP to
see what small changes in various parameters do.

I had presumed you had already do this (or something similar) in order
to say that slightly longer than a 1/4 wavelength was ideal. However,
I have always assumed that the steeper the angle of the radials, the
more the groundplane becomes like a vertical halfwave dipole - and the
lower becomes the angle of radiation.

You are right, very steep radials become the lower half of a half wave
dipole as the currents do not cancel eachother and contribute to the
field of the quarter wave monopole. The "ultimate" version is the
sleeve dipole.

Not really.

When they are in the horizontal plane, the contribution to the total
radiation pattern is very small, and the contribution from the radials
is even zero for the vertically polarized component at zero elevation.

The theoretical gain of a GP with horizontal radials, radials drooping
45 degrees and and drooping 85 degrees is 1.42, 2.22, and 3.67 dbi.

You may check your simulations, as in free space you will not exceed
the half wave dipole gain with near vertical radials (for the quarter
wave version).

Addressed in another post.

My results (IE3D, now Mentor Graphics Hyperlynx):
Quarter wave radiator over 4 quarter wave radials, no sloping:
impedance at resonance 23 Ohms, Gain at zero elevation: 1.52 dBi

0.625 wave radiator over 4 quarter wave radials, no sloping:
Gain at zero elevation: 1.52 dBi, 2.29 dBi at 20 degr elevation.

0.5 wave radiator over 4 quarter wave radials, no sloping:
Gain at zero elevation: 2.05 dBi.

Quarter wave radiator over 4 quarter wave radials, 45 degrees sloping:
Impedance at resonance 54 Ohms, gain at zero elevation: 1.97 dBi

Quarter wave radiator over 4 quarter wave radials, 85 degrees sloping:
Impedance at resonance 74 Ohms, gain at zero elevation: 2.14 dBi

All in free space, without a mast.

Adding a mast, especially for the sloping case can give large
deviation depending on the CM impedance as seen from the floating
ground. I did simulations and current measurements for my own mast,
but the results cannot be applied to other configurations.

As I stated before, the difference between the configurations is
hardly measurable. Nice to see that the over-rated 5/8 lambda antenna
doens't perform better then the quarter wave antenna (at low elevation
angle).

Though the design is more demanding, I prefer the half wave option as
you can use less, sloping, shorter radials without running into common
mode mast current problems.

--
Wim
PA3DJS
Please remove abc first in case of PM