Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Frank, don't forget to use a 1/4-wave vertical when calculating
efficiency. I assume you always include the power in the ground wave in the total power radiated when calculating efficiency. I think radial length intervals of 0.5 metres will be OK for 100 or more radials. Reg, I have always used the 1/4 wave vertical to calculate efficiency. Most of my calculations do not include the surface wave. The problem with including the surface wave is that it is computed over a cylindrical surface at x meters from the antenna. Technically not a surface, but rather a vertical line in cylindrical coordinates. The surface is implied due to the expected symmetry of radiation. In my calculations I have taken "x" as 200 m, so as to ensure the result is in the far-field at 8 MHz (nominal 5 wavelengths). I compute the field at 1 m intervals, in the "z" direction to 200 m. To include the total field I would have to allow z to approach infinity. Taking these data from the NEC output text file, I import it to Excel. In Excel I compute the radial distance and elevation angle to the source. Since my increments are in steps of one meter I can only approximate integral degree points; removing those points far from integral degrees. I could employ linear interpolation, but the field intensity variation is relatively smooth, and adds no discernable ripple to the radiation pattern. I then normalize these data to 1 m to match the spherical data for the sky wave pattern. At 45 degrees elevation there is very little ground wave effects, I can then combine the two normalized sets of data, and numerically integrate over a hemispherical surface. Sorry to bore you with these details, but just to give an idea of the tedious steps involved in including the surface wave. To compute the total radiated sky wave involves a simple command in NEC. Just the same I can compute the total radiated power at 0.5 m and 10 m radial lengths as a comparison. At every 0.5 m it would drive me nuts. Attempting to model a 100 radial system I continually run into road blocks. At one point I had a complex matrix with 3.6 million entries. Still I think I have a viable model that needs just a little refinement. Due to the rotational symmetry of the structure I can employ methods that greatly reduce run time. The model that should work will consist of thirty-three 10 cm radials. At the end of these short radials I connect three 9.9 m radials for a total of 99 radials. If I run into problems I may have to reduce the segmentation to 25 cm. What is interesting, in my preliminary results, is that there is only a 2% improvement in sky wave total radiated power with 120 radials over 36 radials. Frank |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
"The Radio Handbook" Editors and Engineers 9th Edition, 1942 | Boatanchors | |||
FS: Palomar Engineers PT-340 Tuner-Tuner | Swap | |||
FS: Palomar Engineers MDB-2 Magnetic Balun | Shortwave | |||
For the electrical engineers | Homebrew |