On 26 Mar, 19:27, "Jimmie D" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...





Antennas seemed to have evolved into structures that
are parallel or at right angles to the earths surface
Why is this or is it asthetics that is driving this thinking?
My research on the subject evolves around the vector formation
of radiation and where the addition of the vectors involved
which creats radiation is at an angle to the radiator..
This suggests that for best radiative advantage it is
this vector that should be parallel to the earths surface
and not the physical radiator. This appears to be born out
by following my Gaussian approach to radiator design.
So the question of habitual arrangement of antenna arrays
parallel or at right angles to the earths surface as
being the best arrangement needs some sort of validation.
Any thoughts as to why it should be so and the scientific
facts that support it?
Art

What angle did you derive was the best angle to mount an anenna? Please show
experimental data to backup your conclusions.

Jimmie- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Heh Jimmie,
I was looking at a book that showed the scanning lines of a tv.
It also showed aperture as being bisected equally by these same
scanning lines.
Since aperture is directly related to gain one could probably state
that the
angle of the scan lines on a TV is directly related to the tipping
angle for radiation. Both are magnetically related ie angle of release
of an electron so you may get a better answer from a T.V. technician
with respect to angles than ham radio operators. Isn't science great
when your brain is nimble and curious!
Art