Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
David wrote:
But if the field of the radials cancels out, is there any benefit in having radials in receive mode? Yes. If you eliminate the radials, you have a single conductor wire (the "antenna") connected to a feedline or receiver. The feedline or receiver has two terminals which comprise an electrical circuit. If you leave one of those conductors open circuited, current induced by the passing signal will not flow from the "antenna" to the receiver or feedline. In practice, it's nearly impossible to really open circuit the other conductor (that is, the one not connected to the "antenna") -- the outside of the feedline, if coax, will become the other half of the antenna, as will anything conductive connected to the receiver chassis. This is often undesirable because those conductors are more likely to receive noise from local sources than if the entire antenna is in the clear. It will also distort the antenna pattern, possibly in a major way. I've put "antenna" in quotes because the vertical wire is only half the antenna. The other half is either radials or, if radials are missing, the other conductors I mentioned. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Need some help designing a receiving antenna | Antenna | |||
How Many : Inverted "L" Antenna Radials for a Receiving Only Antenna ? | Shortwave | |||
Gap antennas, elevated radials | Antenna | |||
Any experiences with inverted L and elevated radials | Antenna |