|
Yagi antenna design question
"Wes" wrote in message
ups.com... This will be the last word I have on this topic. As: This is the last word from the higher authority, like, no more arguments, I am right, case closed? Just in case you might be wrong, here we go:-) I have placed two files he www.k6mhe.com/n7ws/N7WS_Yagi_Resonant.EZ and he www.k6mhe.com/n7ws/N7WS_Yagi_Shortened.EZ The files are models of my 20-meter three-element Yagi that are as nearly representative of the physical antenna and its location as I can make them. The only difference between them is the half-length of the DE. The actual antenna uses the shortened version with a stub (Beta) matching/balun arrangement. What you mean half length of DE? Resonant DE is 410.68" long Shortened DE is 399.64" long - that is 11.04" difference Resonant frequency on resonant model is 14.18 and shortened is 14.48 Instead of the integral stub, which Yuri believes is part of the antenna that is "folded back" along the boom, I will move the matching system away from this location using an ideal ½ wavelength (34.7 foot) transmission line with an ideal current balun at the antenna end. I don't believe anyone would argue that the feedpoint impedance is not replicated exactly at the input end of this line. Yuri believes? Is anyone there who does not believe that hairpin loading stub or beta match stub inserted in the middle of driven element is not the part of the element, aka, standing wave resonant circuit? Like there is no RF current flowing into the hairpin? Like element does not have to be shortened to compensate for the insertion of the stub? Doesn't Yagi antenna work with half wave (+-) resonant elements? If you loaded, inserted stubs in the parasitic elements, you would not have to shorten them? "Calculations" proving ??? snipped The network loss remains 0.02 dB. So much for this less than ideal stub vs. Yuri's preferred discrete inductor. There you have it. The stub matching method is equal to a discrete L- network in efficiency, it does not detract from the antenna efficiency one bit, it can incorporate the balun function without additional components, it grounds the feedpoint, with a little sealant on the cable, it is weatherproof and unlike Gammas and Tee-matches, it will handle full power without being prone to capacitor breakdown. It is not part of the radiator; it is part of the matching network. Period. Claiming that beta match or hairpin loading inductance is not the part of the radiator is news to me. Claiming that driven element was shortened to half, when in fact just by 11" and resonant frequency moved from abt 14.18 to 14.48 MHz, and modeling the antenna without the beta match hair pin, and then "calculating" 0.02 dB difference in gain, sure "proves" the point. Here I described the real life situation and modeling by using simple case of 40m dipole, resonant and resonant shortened with "beta match" hairpin. I maintain the resonant frequency and compensate for the effects of inserting the hairpin. The gain on the dipole drops by 0.15 dB when fed at the 75 ohm point and by 0.2 dB when fed close to 50 ohm point. You can read the rest at my web site: http://www.k3bu.us/beta_match.htm Again, it has ben proven by modeling and in practice that loading solenoid coils are better performers as loading element than hairpins, especially when better symetry along the element is important for bettern pattern and F/B. But I guess, that's another story to argue. Not the last word from me, if I am wrong and made error in modeling, I would like to be corrected. (I tried to post the EZNEC files, but having problem downloading them. Will try to rectify.) 73 Yuri, K3BU.us |
Yagi antenna design question
On Feb 10, 7:27 pm, "Yuri Blanarovich" wrote:
My previous ISP sold me off to a new one. SInce that time I've had no end of email problems and in addition the new guys don't provide newsgroups, so I've been reduced to using Google Groups. Yuch. I spent too much time composing a response to Yuri's last post and then did not see it appear after posting. I will not waste further time, but in a nutshell I offered another case using the self- reactance of the DE as part of the matching network. In this example, to avoid any "loss due to loading" resulting from shortening the DE, I *lengthen* the DE to obtain an inductive reactance for the series arm of an L-network and then use a shunt capacitor for the second matching element. The model is he http://www.k6mhe.com/n7ws/N7WS_Yagi_Lengthened.EZ Run the analysis, and add a shunt 195 pF and see what you get. Regards, Wes N7WS |
Yagi antenna design question
Looks like W8JI type of response: I am right, I will not respond to
questions and arguments and my is last word!" Fact 1. - When hairpin or beta match is inserted in the driven element or any resonant half wave dipole, it has current flowing through it. Fact 2. That element has to be shortened if resonance is to be maintained, which means that it is a center inductive loading element, hairpin, beta match is the part of the antenna standing wave circuit. Fact 3. There is current that would more, less belong to the antenna element flowing in the hairpin, folded on itself and on right angle to driven element, not contributing to overall current distribution. That can be seen in my EZNEC model in the article. That portion of the current is not in line with the rest of the element, it is missing from as to compared to full size element and therefore efficiency is slightly lower (middle part of the cosine wave is "missing" folded with hairpin). On typical 40m dipole, as I modeled, it accounts for about 0.2 dB loss. The original argument was is the beta match lossy or not. My modeling of the real situation is ignored, also findings and experimental verification of others who replaced hairpins with solenoid coils is ignored. What you are "arguing" is that if you place the matching network in the driven element (now you even lengthen it) that there is no loss. http://www.k3bu.us/beta_match.htm Is my modeling of 40m dipole wrong? Where? On dipole it shows about 0.2 dB loss, which gets bit more when used in multielement array. If you are denying that there is a RF antenna current flowing in the Beta match hairpin, then you are denying reality and I rest my case. No point of arguing or discussing when you do not show where I am wrong, but you offer "proof" by juggling matching components at the feedpoint. We are talking about hairpin that is part of the antenna element, has current flowing in the system and it has feedline attached at the feedpoint of element and hairpin. No tricks with coils or capacitors inserted half wave somewhere. 73 Yuri, K3BU.us We are not arguing loss due to loading, we are arguing - does hairpin beta match contribute to the loss in the system or not. I mentioned that there are better alternatives, if one choses to be less lossy. "Wes" wrote in message oups.com... On Feb 10, 7:27 pm, "Yuri Blanarovich" wrote: My previous ISP sold me off to a new one. SInce that time I've had no end of email problems and in addition the new guys don't provide newsgroups, so I've been reduced to using Google Groups. Yuch. I spent too much time composing a response to Yuri's last post and then did not see it appear after posting. I will not waste further time, but in a nutshell I offered another case using the self- reactance of the DE as part of the matching network. In this example, to avoid any "loss due to loading" resulting from shortening the DE, I *lengthen* the DE to obtain an inductive reactance for the series arm of an L-network and then use a shunt capacitor for the second matching element. The model is he http://www.k6mhe.com/n7ws/N7WS_Yagi_Lengthened.EZ Run the analysis, and add a shunt 195 pF and see what you get. Regards, Wes N7WS |
Yagi antenna design question
On Feb 12, 5:58 pm, "Yuri Blanarovich" wrote:
Looks like W8JI type of response: I am right, I will not respond to questions and arguments and my is last word!" Well: Point 1. What is wrong with a W8JI type of response? Point 2. I already violated my promise to remain silent on this thread, in the pointless belief that it might be possible to reason with you. How wrong I am. Fact 1. - When hairpin or beta match is inserted in the driven element or any resonant half wave dipole, it has current flowing through it. In my "lost" post, I addressed this. I said more-or-less, of course a stub, hairpin, beta, or whatever you would like to call it has current in it. If it didn't then it could be removed without effect. So what? Also if the stub is 1/4 lambda and shorted then the current is maximum at the short. Again, so what? Fact 2. That element has to be shortened if resonance is to be maintained, which means that it is a center inductive loading element, hairpin, beta match is the part of the antenna standing wave circuit. How about calling it a point rather than a fact? The real fact is that when shortened, the DE is no longer resonant. In an earlier post I said, and you apparently chose to ignore it or were too busy formulating a response to read: "Instead of the integral stub, which Yuri believes is part of the antenna that is "folded back" along the boom, I will move the matching system away from this location using an ideal ½ wavelength (34.7 foot) transmission line with an ideal current balun at the antenna end. I don't believe anyone would argue that the feedpoint impedance is not replicated exactly at the input end of this line. " Now when the hairpin, beta, or lumped inductor is 1/2 lambda away from the DE and it acts *exactly* the same, are you telling me that it is still part of the radiator and "loads" the DE? If you are saying yes, then this discussion really is over. If you will keep an open mind, let's say to keep the numbers easy, that the DE feedpoint when shortened appropriately is 25 -j25. At the input to an ideal 1/2 wavelength line, terminated with the DE, we will also see 25 -j25. The parallel equivalent of this (I should use admittences, but I'll leave it as impedance) is 50 || -j50. Shunting this with an inductive reactance +j 50 results in 50 +j0, or a perfect match. Now I suppose it can be argued that this is "resonating" the DE, although I would prefer to say the system is resonant. I don't see how you can argue that the added inductor is "radiating" or "subtracting" from the radiation of the DE, or whatever your point is. Nevertheless, you give it a try below. But I'm not sure Google is going to post this anyway, so I'm stopping here. I think the OP's original question has been answered: For all practical purposes, the radiation characteristics are unaffected by the matching scheme. Fact 3. There is current that would more, less belong to the antenna element flowing in the hairpin, folded on itself and on right angle to driven element, not contributing to overall current distribution. That can be seen in my EZNEC model in the article. That portion of the current is not in line with the rest of the element, it is missing from as to compared to full size element and therefore efficiency is slightly lower (middle part of the cosine wave is "missing" folded with hairpin). On typical 40m dipole, as I modeled, it accounts for about 0.2 dB loss. The original argument was is the beta match lossy or not. My modeling of the real situation is ignored, also findings and experimental verification of others who replaced hairpins with solenoid coils is ignored. What you are "arguing" is that if you place the matching network in the driven element (now you even lengthen it) that there is no loss.http://www.k3bu.us/beta_match.htm Is my modeling of 40m dipole wrong? Where? On dipole it shows about 0.2 dB loss, which gets bit more when used in multielement array. If you are denying that there is a RF antenna current flowing in the Beta match hairpin, then you are denying reality and I rest my case. No point of arguing or discussing when you do not show where I am wrong, but you offer "proof" by juggling matching components at the feedpoint. We are talking about hairpin that is part of the antenna element, has current flowing in the system and it has feedline attached at the feedpoint of element and hairpin. No tricks with coils or capacitors inserted half wave somewhere. 73 Yuri, K3BU.us We are not arguing loss due to loading, we are arguing - does hairpin beta match contribute to the loss in the system or not. I mentioned that there are better alternatives, if one choses to be less lossy. "Wes" wrote in message oups.com... On Feb 10, 7:27 pm, "Yuri Blanarovich" wrote: My previous ISP sold me off to a new one. SInce that time I've had no end of email problems and in addition the new guys don't provide newsgroups, so I've been reduced to using Google Groups. Yuch. I spent too much time composing a response to Yuri's last post and then did not see it appear after posting. I will not waste further time, but in a nutshell I offered another case using the self- reactance of the DE as part of the matching network. In this example, to avoid any "loss due to loading" resulting from shortening the DE, I *lengthen* the DE to obtain an inductive reactance for the series arm of an L-network and then use a shunt capacitor for the second matching element. The model is he http://www.k6mhe.com/n7ws/N7WS_Yagi_Lengthened.EZ Run the analysis, and add a shunt 195 pF and see what you get. Regards, Wes N7WS |
Yagi antenna design question
Wes,
you are ignoring my questions and modeled example showing the situation in question: resonant dipole loaded and with beta match vs. full size straight, reflecting the real life situation in question. You believe what you want. I have showed dipole element and EZNEC model of effect of beta match on performance of antenna: reduced gain, narrower bandwidth. It shows the current distribution along the element and the hairpin beta match. That current along the beta match is "taken out" of the element and causing reduction in gain and narrower bandwidth. Model shows that and measurements confirm that. This is just another application of the current along the antenna coil (loading element, hairpin, etc.), its effect on the current distribution along the radiator and corresponding efficiency. Believe it, or not! 73 Yuri, http://www.k3bu.us/beta_match.htm |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:11 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com