Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Owen Duffy" wrote in message ... "Frank" wrote in news:u9qZh.14500$JF6.4868 @edtnps90: Owen, It may not be too critical, but would not the Sommerfeld/Norton method improve accuracy? Hi Frank My understanding was that the MININEC ground model was the better to use if the model caused current to flow into ground (as mine does). The draft model is at http://www.vk1od.net/multibandunload.../13MVERT01.nec if you want to play with it. Owen I was not thinking Owen. I forgot that some versions of NEC support the MININEC ground. I have loaded your program, but noticed my version of NEC does not support a "GN" entry of "3" in the "I1" field. It thinks it is a Sommerfeld/Norton ground, but does not recognize the conductivity and permittivity fields. About the only way I could get the program to run is to extend "GW 10" below round -- at a guess about 5 segments should be ok. I am also concerned about some discontinuity with the large diameter change from GW 9 to GW 10. Also GW 1 to GW 2. Initially I will set all diameters to 1 mm, and see what I get by running the AVG test. Frank |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Frank's" wrote in
news:4OxZh.8833$Dq6.8346@edtnps82: "Owen Duffy" wrote in message ... "Frank" wrote in news:u9qZh.14500$JF6.4868 @edtnps90: Owen, It may not be too critical, but would not the Sommerfeld/Norton method improve accuracy? Hi Frank My understanding was that the MININEC ground model was the better to use if the model caused current to flow into ground (as mine does). The draft model is at http://www.vk1od.net/multibandunload.../13MVERT01.nec if you want to play with it. Owen I was not thinking Owen. I forgot that some versions of NEC support the MININEC ground. I have loaded your program, but noticed my version of NEC does not support a "GN" entry of "3" in the "I1" field. It thinks it is a Sommerfeld/Norton ground, but does not recognize the conductivity and permittivity fields. About the only way I could get the program to run is to extend "GW 10" below round -- at a guess about 5 segments should be ok. I am also concerned about some discontinuity with the large diameter change from GW 9 to GW 10. Also GW 1 to GW 2. Initially I will set all diameters to 1 mm, and see what I get by running the AVG test. Hi Frank, I built the models in 4NEC2 and EZNEC, both using the MININEC ground feature. My guess is that the radials are far enough clear of the ground that NEC- 2 should be adequate for modelling, but it would be interested to see what results you get from NEC-4. Re extending wire 10, don't forget it is loaded, so you need to deal with that. Owen |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I built the models in 4NEC2 and EZNEC, both using the MININEC ground
feature. My guess is that the radials are far enough clear of the ground that NEC- 2 should be adequate for modelling, but it would be interested to see what results you get from NEC-4. Re extending wire 10, don't forget it is loaded, so you need to deal with that. Owen Owen, GNEC reports the following. Note I have taken the ratio of the current magnitudes without regard to the phase relationship. I can send you a zipped copy of the NEC output file if you are interested. Freq TAG 10 TAG 1 Ratio ABS SEG 169 SEG 1 (MHz) (mA) (mA) (dB) 3.8 1.43 6.5 13 7.1 0.59 5.4 19.2 10.1 0.25 1.0 12 14.1 0.036 3.4 39.5 Large currents in the 3.8 MHz radials are evident on 30 m. I have removed the loading from TAG 10, and EK is not required in NEC 4. Also I show TAG 10 at extending 3 m below ground. Probably not realistic, but I am always confusing meters with feet! Frank |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Frank's" wrote in
news:ay2_h.21$Vi6.12@edtnps82: I built the models in 4NEC2 and EZNEC, both using the MININEC ground feature. My guess is that the radials are far enough clear of the ground that NEC- 2 should be adequate for modelling, but it would be interested to see what results you get from NEC-4. Re extending wire 10, don't forget it is loaded, so you need to deal with that. Owen Owen, GNEC reports the following. Note I have taken the ratio of the current magnitudes without regard to the phase relationship. I can send you a zipped copy of the NEC output file if you are interested. Freq TAG 10 TAG 1 Ratio ABS SEG 169 SEG 1 (MHz) (mA) (mA) (dB) 3.8 1.43 6.5 13 7.1 0.59 5.4 19.2 10.1 0.25 1.0 12 14.1 0.036 3.4 39.5 Large currents in the 3.8 MHz radials are evident on 30 m. I have removed the loading from TAG 10, and EK is not required in NEC 4. Also I show TAG 10 at extending 3 m below ground. Probably not realistic, but I am always confusing meters with feet! Hi Frank, A plot of this current ratio shows very steep slope around the design frequencies. A plot of my model results is at http://www.vk1od.net/multibandunload...al/new_pa1.gif . Ratio of mast current to radiator current at junction: (MHz) NEC-4(dB) NEC-2 3.8 -13 -14.6 7.1 -19.2 -17.6 10.1 -12 -9.9 14.1 -39.5 -38.3 Note that for the NEC-2 model, these were not the optimal frequencies. Owen |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Radials | Antenna | |||
Radials | Antenna | |||
Decoupling coax transmission line | Antenna | |||
Ground Radials - a new look! | Equipment | |||
Radials for 6-BTV | Antenna |