Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:56:07 +1000, Alan Peake
wrote: Before I go to the trouble of putting up a rhombic, I've been using NEC to get an idea of the gain, radiation angle etc for various leg lengths. It all looks very promising on the computer but I'd be interested in real-world experiences. For example, how well does the real antenna approach the PC simulation when various factors like wire sag, uneven ground, presence of trees and shrubbery? Hi Alan, Rhombics were the stars of antenna developement in the late 1920s for RCA. For very long wavelengths, certainly few other practical designs could achieve the same gains. For shorter wavelengths, other designs replaced the Rhombic (poor return on real estate in comparison). If the wire sags such that most of it is on the ground, you suffer. This is a judgement call otherwise and sag is quite within the ability to model if judgement demands. The presences of trees and shrubbery is something all designs suffer. Unless you are speaking of an antenna in a forest, the Rhombic would probably do quite well (after all, it is wavelengths long, as are few trees) until you start getting into short wavelengths. Rhombics are few and far between these days. Reasons are principally wavelength based in comparison to available real estate. Few have the real estate for long wavelengths. If you are working at a short wavelength, there is a better design to do the same job. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
What's the best Source of Info On Rhombics? | Antenna | |||
VOA Delano: 1. Uses Rhombics (still!) 2. Staff needed instructions on not getting fried! | Shortwave | |||
Rhombic for 80m | Antenna |