Help with EZNEC
 

I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?


Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike

Help with EZNEC
 

amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?


Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike



I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are
commercial, could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see
why they made these.

tom
K0TAR

Help with EZNEC
 

On 12 Jun, 18:16, Tom Ring wrote:
amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?

Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike

I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are
commercial, could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see
why they made these.

tom
K0TAR

I would imagine he is checking for cross polarisation

Help with EZNEC
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
. ..
amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?


Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike



I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are commercial,
could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see why they made
these.

tom
K0TAR

Very broadbanded.

Help with EZNEC
 

Jimmie D wrote:

I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are commercial,
could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see why they made
these.

tom
K0TAR

Very broadbanded.



Ridiculous.

tom
K0TAR

Help with EZNEC
 

amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?

Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike

Under 'Desc Options', under '2D Misc', under 'Outer Ring',
you can set the gain of the outer ring to -19 dBi for
both antennas.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Help with EZNEC
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
. ..
amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?


Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike



I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are commercial,
could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see why they made
these.

tom
K0TAR

but 0dBi would be perfectly omnidirectional by definition. either he is
reading the scale wrong or is looking at f/b ratio instead of gain, or maybe
looking at depth of a null or sidelobes.

Help with EZNEC
 

In article , Tom Ring
wrote:

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are
commercial, could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see
why they made these.

tom
K0TAR

Hello, and you can just integrate a pad into the antenna feedpoint and
market it as a broadband antenna - Works 2-30 MHz with no tuning required!
;-) Sincerely, and 73s from N4GG0,

John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail:
Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337

Help with EZNEC
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?

Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike

Under 'Desc Options', under '2D Misc', under 'Outer Ring',
you can set the gain of the outer ring to -19 dBi for
both antennas.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Thank you Cecil, I'll give that a try.

Help with EZNEC
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
. ..
amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?


Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike



I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are commercial,
could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see why they made
these.

tom
K0TAR
I'm modeling a Flag antenna.
It is a directional antenna.
Small size for the low bands.
Btw, this site has one that has -43dbi gain.
http://taliaphoto.com/n4is/BIG_DUAL_LOOP.html
I'd like to have one!
Mike

Help with EZNEC
 

"Dave" wrote in message
news:muPbi.10807$Ar5.10317@trndny01...

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
. ..
amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?


Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike



I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are commercial,
could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see why they made
these.

tom
K0TAR

but 0dBi would be perfectly omnidirectional by definition.
Yes.
either he is reading the scale wrong
No.
or is looking at f/b ratio instead of gain,
No.
or maybe looking at depth of a null or sidelobes.
No.
Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"amdx" wrote in message
...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
amdx wrote:
I'm comparing elevation plots of an antenna. They have different
forward gains, this makes it difficult to compare the lobe shape.

Is there a way to equalize the gains to do a comparison?

Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike

Under 'Desc Options', under '2D Misc', under 'Outer Ring',
you can set the gain of the outer ring to -19 dBi for
both antennas.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Thank you Cecil, I'll give that a try.

I tried it Cecil, that only changes the scale of the plot, both antenna
patterns just move there relative positions.
I need to add gain to one pattern or subtract from the other and put them
on the same plot.
Thanks, Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

amdx wrote:
I tried it Cecil, that only changes the scale of the plot, both antenna
patterns just move there relative positions.
I need to add gain to one pattern or subtract from the other and put them
on the same plot.

I guess I don't understand what you are wanting
to do. Is -19 dBi and -23 dBi the maximum gain
for each respective antenna? Or is that just some
point you want the radiation patterns to have in
common?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
amdx wrote:
I tried it Cecil, that only changes the scale of the plot, both antenna
patterns just move there relative positions.
I need to add gain to one pattern or subtract from the other and put
them
on the same plot.

I guess I don't understand what you are wanting
to do. Is -19 dBi and -23 dBi the maximum gain
for each respective antenna?

Yes.

I want the maximum gain point of each antenna to
reach the same point on the plot.
As if I put a 4db amplifier on the -23dbi antenna.
Thanks, Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

amdx wrote:
I want the maximum gain point of each antenna to
reach the same point on the plot.

If the two antennas have different take-off-angles, that
will require a graphics program capable of rotating one
of the graphics by n degrees.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
amdx wrote:
I want the maximum gain point of each antenna to
reach the same point on the plot.

I should have said " I want the maximum gain point of
each antenna to reach same db level on the graph."
Sorry about that confusing line.

If the two antennas have different take-off-angles, that
will require a graphics program capable of rotating one
of the graphics by n degrees.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I have put a picture on abse to show what I want.
Subject Line: Two Flag Patterns.
Thanks, Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

amdx wrote:
I have put a picture on abse to show what I want.
Subject Line: Two Flag Patterns.

I doubt you can do that within EZNEC. It will probably
require generating two graphics and superposing them -
which you can accomplish by changing the reference gain
of the outer ring in EZNEC and using, e.g. MS Paint
for the superposition.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
amdx wrote:
I have put a picture on abse to show what I want.
Subject Line: Two Flag Patterns.

I doubt you can do that within EZNEC. It will probably
require generating two graphics and superposing them -
which you can accomplish by changing the reference gain
of the outer ring in EZNEC and using, e.g. MS Paint
for the superposition.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I'll give that one a try.
Thanks again, Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"amdx" wrote in message
...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
amdx wrote:
I have put a picture on abse to show what I want.
Subject Line: Two Flag Patterns.

I doubt you can do that within EZNEC. It will probably
require generating two graphics and superposing them -
which you can accomplish by changing the reference gain
of the outer ring in EZNEC and using, e.g. MS Paint
for the superposition.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I'll give that one a try.
Thanks again, Mike

Hey Cecil, That does exactly what I wanted, although not
in the program I wanted.
Thanks, Mike

Help with EZNEC
 

Kinda thought so! got copy of THAT loop antenna-
Lots of loss, but abt 28 dB F-B ratio (great for
eliminateing stations off the back, and , as stated
very broadband! And the model at 12 mhz, did to
1.8 MHz , also 28 MHz- swr is flat (20:1)!, but
the directivity is seems to be flat,too. An
interesting antenna. Tks to Bill W5WVO for the
model! But the
4 db diff (on the angles of "radiation", probably
mean little on a change of pattern.maybe 2-3
degrees! (3dB points)! Definately NOT for trying
to xmit to! But with a 20 dB preamp looks like a
great recieve antenna! Jim NN7K


Example: I have an antenna that is -19dbi and one that is -23dbi.
Can I add 4db of gain to one to make the comparison easier?
Mike

I'm modeling a Flag antenna.
It is a directional antenna.
Small size for the low bands.
Btw, this site has one that has -43dbi gain.
http://taliaphoto.com/n4is/BIG_DUAL_LOOP.html
I'd like to have one!
Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

Cecil-- think what he wants is a Pattern, of
antenna 1, layed over Pattern 2, Both referenced
to Each other (at a 0 dB reference. ) but as
stated, don't think the (-3) angle will change
drastically, nor the F.B. Ratio! Jim NN7K



Cecil Moore wrote:
amdx wrote:
I want the maximum gain point of each antenna to
reach the same point on the plot.

If the two antennas have different take-off-angles, that
will require a graphics program capable of rotating one
of the graphics by n degrees.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"amdx" wrote in message
...

"amdx" wrote in message
...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
amdx wrote:
I have put a picture on abse to show what I want.
Subject Line: Two Flag Patterns.

I doubt you can do that within EZNEC. It will probably
require generating two graphics and superposing them -
which you can accomplish by changing the reference gain
of the outer ring in EZNEC and using, e.g. MS Paint
for the superposition.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I'll give that one a try.
Thanks again, Mike

Hey Cecil, That does exactly what I wanted, although not
in the program I wanted.
Thanks, Mike

I have never used it, but there is a button on the main screen labeled Ref
Level, defaults to 0 dbi.

Tam/WB2TT

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

P.S. Check out the "Traceview" option, at least
in EZNEC 5. Go to "View", then open "Traceview"!
Think this might allow you to compair 2 overlayed
patterns-- tho haven't gone thru manual-- YET!
Jim NN7K

Tam/WB2TT wrote:

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"Jim - NN7K" wrote in message
...
Cecil-- think what he wants is a Pattern, of
antenna 1, layed over Pattern 2, Both referenced
to Each other (at a 0 dB reference. ) but as
stated, don't think the (-3) angle will change
drastically, nor the F.B. Ratio! Jim NN7K



Cecil Moore wrote:
amdx wrote:
I want the maximum gain point of each antenna to
reach the same point on the plot.

If the two antennas have different take-off-angles, that
will require a graphics program capable of rotating one
of the graphics by n degrees.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Just for fun and discussion I posted a plot with 6 different size
Flag antennas.
See it on abse, Subject line: Multiple Flag Ant. Patterns
Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

And, BTW, this DOES allows comparison of Plots, from
2 (or more?) antennas. I Tried it, works Great!
Jim

Jim - NN7K wrote:
P.S. Check out the "Traceview" option, at least
in EZNEC 5. Go to "View", then open "Traceview"!
Think this might allow you to compair 2 overlayed
patterns-- tho haven't gone thru manual-- YET! Jim NN7K

Tam/WB2TT wrote:

Help with EZNEC
 

Dave wrote:
I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are commercial,
could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see why they made
these.

tom
K0TAR

but 0dBi would be perfectly omnidirectional by definition. either he is
reading the scale wrong or is looking at f/b ratio instead of gain, or maybe
looking at depth of a null or sidelobes.



Actually they could have gain that low and still be directional. It
would probably be silly to do so, but with nice lossy components, quite
possible.

Heck, I bet someone here may have even done something like it for some
reasonable engineering design.

tom
K0TAR

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"Jim - NN7K" wrote in message
t...
And, BTW, this DOES allows comparison of Plots, from
2 (or more?) antennas. I Tried it, works Great!
Jim

Jim - NN7K wrote:
P.S. Check out the "Traceview" option, at least
in EZNEC 5. Go to "View", then open "Traceview"!
Think this might allow you to compair 2 overlayed
patterns-- tho haven't gone thru manual-- YET! Jim NN7K

Tam/WB2TT wrote:

Hi Jim,
I tried this and it's not working for me.
I can only get one trace in the view.
Can you walk me through your sequence of clicks?
Thanks, Mike

Help with EZNEC
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
. ..
Dave wrote:
I am wondering what type of antenna has -19 or -23 dBi gain. I would
speculate that they are quite omnidirectional, and the patterns wouldn't
be significantly different.

It's tough to get gain that low unintentionally. If they are
commercial, could you please point me at a web site? I'd love to see
why they made these.

tom
K0TAR

but 0dBi would be perfectly omnidirectional by definition. either he is
reading the scale wrong or is looking at f/b ratio instead of gain, or
maybe looking at depth of a null or sidelobes.

Actually they could have gain that low and still be directional. It would
probably be silly to do so, but with nice lossy components, quite
possible.

Heck, I bet someone here may have even done something like it for some
reasonable engineering design.

tom
K0TAR

Do a little research on the Flag or pennant antenna.
It's a rotatable antenna that has a good f/b ratio at low
frequencies. I've measured 40db f/b at 1430khz.
I have a variable termination.
Mike

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

Try this (with Eznec 5)

Step 1 Open (or write) your file.
Step 2 Do farfield plot , then save
this file as (Tracefile (.pdf,pdf3)
You need to name this file!.

Step 3 Do the SAME steps for Antenna #2 (and
3,4,5, ect) be sure to use diff names!

Now, Step 4,go to (view, traceview), and this

will give a warning.Run , under the "traceview
window, the FIRST FILE you named.

Step 5 Now , click on "Add trace". insert the name of
the SECOND file you saved ( Warning- both must be in
SAME direction, AZMATH, or ELEVATION for this to
overlay) , and both ants pointing the SAME WAY!

Step 6 either print it, or add another file .
Think you find this works pretty well .
NOTE: this DOESN'T set yhe max gain to BOTH
antennas, but is great for comparison purposes.
Think its pg 93 in the pdf manual (not to be confused
with 93 on the adobe screen!
Jim NN7K

amdx wrote:


Hi Jim,
I tried this and it's not working for me.
I can only get one trace in the view.
Can you walk me through your sequence of clicks?
Thanks, Mike

Help with EZNEC
 

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:45:35 -0500, Tom Ring
wrote:

Actually they could have gain that low and still be directional.
....
Heck, I bet someone here may have even done something like it for some
reasonable engineering design.

.... tsk, tsk, tsk. Such a fall from grace for the fractal antenna.
Gone, and long forgotten.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

FYI, Roy will be at the Friedrichshafen hamfest in Germany next week, so
he may already be traveling.

Like most travelers, he may have access to e-mail, but is unlikely to
have a newsgroup feed.


--

73 from Ian GM3SEK

Help with EZNEC
 

On 13 Jun, 23:01, Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:45:35 -0500, Tom Ring
wrote:



Actually they could have gain that low and still be directional.
...
Heck, I bet someone here may have even done something like it for some
reasonable engineering design.

... tsk, tsk, tsk. Such a fall from grace for the fractal antenna.
Gone, and long forgotten.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

If Fractus is the Fractal antenna business then it is still doing
well.
That was another antenna that amateurs tried to remove from the
face of the earth because it provided a new aproach to antennas.
Seems like professionals in the antenna industry are not made
from the same mold as the self styled amateur experts that
deride the new from their couch as they slowly pass away.
When they become silent keys any lock that they may have had
on the new decays in lock step with their gutless frames
Art

Help with EZNEC
 

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:35:39 -0700, art wrote:

On 13 Jun, 23:01, Richard Clark wrote:
... tsk, tsk, tsk. Such a fall from grace for the fractal antenna.
Gone, and long forgotten.

That was another antenna that amateurs tried to remove from the
face of the earth because it provided a new aproach to antennas.

Hi Arthur,

Your soap box would carry more weight if you actually contributed to
the design.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Help with EZNEC
 

On 14 Jun, 09:37, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:35:39 -0700, art wrote:
On 13 Jun, 23:01, Richard Clark wrote:
... tsk, tsk, tsk. Such a fall from grace for the fractal antenna.
Gone, and long forgotten.
That was another antenna that amateurs tried to remove from the
face of the earth because it provided a new aproach to antennas.

Hi Arthur,

Your soap box would carry more weight if you actually contributed to
the design.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

My point is that it is not "gone and long forgotten" despite
the venom from you and Roy in you attempts to devalue the idea.
Here we are twenty years on and the antenna survives as a
new technology. Just shows that you can't stop science when
the shrill of your voices runs out of puff. Fractal antennas
are now in the books signifying that the efforts of you and Roy
was all for naught and could not overcome the test of time.
Now your efforts are concentrated anew where again you will fail
despite the shrillness of your wailing. Ideas are for the books
and your venom doesn't count for inclusion.

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

On 13 Jun, 23:46, Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
FYI, Roy will be at the Friedrichshafen hamfest in Germany next week, so
he may already be traveling.

Like most travelers, he may have access to e-mail, but is unlikely to
have a newsgroup feed.

--

73 from Ian GM3SEK

Gee. I wonder if he will comment on the state of education in Germany
relative to his own American education. He may well be returning
now by swimming the pond in desparation.

Help with EZNEC
 

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:24:18 -0700, art wrote:

My point is that it is not "gone and long forgotten" despite
the venom from you and Roy in you attempts to devalue the idea.

Hi Arthur,

Unfortunately you don't understand the technology, so you lack the
authority to make this anything more than a sentimental statement.

My website contains more than 300 pages of results from real Fractal
antennas and it remains the largest website in the world devoted to
that topic alone. It even supports examples of fractal designs that
you couldn't beat.

Care to compare examples? Mine will be far more length efficient than
anything you could offer. They will be non-planar. They will offer a
better turning radius than yours.

No, comparison would quickly reveal all this and thus I will leave you
with the last gasping denial. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Help with EZNEC- Hey Roy!
 

"Jim - NN7K" wrote in message
t...
Try this (with Eznec 5)

Step 1 Open (or write) your file.
Step 2 Do farfield plot , then save
this file as (Tracefile (.pdf,pdf3)
You need to name this file!.

Step 3 Do the SAME steps for Antenna #2 (and 3,4,5, ect) be sure to use
diff names!

Now, Step 4,go to (view, traceview), and this

will give a warning.Run , under the "traceview window, the FIRST FILE you
named.

Step 5 Now , click on "Add trace". insert the name of
the SECOND file you saved ( Warning- both must be in
SAME direction, AZMATH, or ELEVATION for this to overlay) , and both ants
pointing the SAME WAY!

Step 6 either print it, or add another file .
Think you find this works pretty well .
NOTE: this DOESN'T set the max gain to BOTH
antennas, but is great for comparison purposes.

Ok, thanks Jim, I have done this and add a trace does just
that, but as you say,
"this DOESN'T set the max gain to BOTH antennas"
I want to equalize the max gain, So it looks like the copy to
Paint and compare there is the best solution so far.
Thanks, Mike

Help with EZNEC
 

On 14 Jun, 14:35, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:24:18 -0700, art wrote:
My point is that it is not "gone and long forgotten" despite
the venom from you and Roy in you attempts to devalue the idea.

Hi Arthur,

Unfortunately you don't understand the technology, so you lack the
authority to make this anything more than a sentimental statement.

My website contains more than 300 pages of results from real Fractal
antennas and it remains the largest website in the world devoted to
that topic alone. It even supports examples of fractal designs that
you couldn't beat.

Care to compare examples? Mine will be far more length efficient than
anything you could offer. They will be non-planar. They will offer a
better turning radius than yours.

No, comparison would quickly reveal all this and thus I will leave you
with the last gasping denial. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Do you think I didn't realise what direction you was heading?
Look at mine not at his!
I remember after you did that work you turned on Chip and
everything he had to say. Heck it then got worse when the
group found out that he was jewish. That was mana for the
group and finally got the job done to get rid of him.
No matter how much shame you feel that will be part of
you forever. Can you remember the last time you said
something nice? That should take a week or so to think about.
You are such a miserable person, always pushing good aside
for the benefit of evil.If your page is the only thing
you can point to as to what you have achieved in the
last twenty years you are indeed in a sorry state.

Help with EZNEC
 

"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 14 Jun, 14:35, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:24:18 -0700, art wrote:
My point is that it is not "gone and long forgotten" despite
the venom from you and Roy in you attempts to devalue the idea.

Hi Arthur,

Unfortunately you don't understand the technology, so you lack the
authority to make this anything more than a sentimental statement.

My website contains more than 300 pages of results from real Fractal
antennas and it remains the largest website in the world devoted to
that topic alone. It even supports examples of fractal designs that
you couldn't beat.

Care to compare examples? Mine will be far more length efficient than
anything you could offer. They will be non-planar. They will offer a
better turning radius than yours.

No, comparison would quickly reveal all this and thus I will leave you
with the last gasping denial. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Do you think I didn't realise what direction you was heading?
Look at mine not at his!
I remember after you did that work you turned on Chip and
everything he had to say. Heck it then got worse when the
group found out that he was jewish. That was mana for the
group and finally got the job done to get rid of him.
No matter how much shame you feel that will be part of
you forever. Can you remember the last time you said
something nice? That should take a week or so to think about.
You are such a miserable person, always pushing good aside
for the benefit of evil.If your page is the only thing
you can point to as to what you have achieved in the
last twenty years you are indeed in a sorry state.

Hey you two, stop it,
this is my thread about EZNEC modeling and Flag antennas. :-)
Mike

Help with EZNEC
 

On 14 Jun, 16:02, "amdx" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...



On 14 Jun, 14:35, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:24:18 -0700, art wrote:
My point is that it is not "gone and long forgotten" despite
the venom from you and Roy in you attempts to devalue the idea.

Hi Arthur,

Unfortunately you don't understand the technology, so you lack the
authority to make this anything more than a sentimental statement.

My website contains more than 300 pages of results from real Fractal
antennas and it remains the largest website in the world devoted to
that topic alone. It even supports examples of fractal designs that
you couldn't beat.

Care to compare examples? Mine will be far more length efficient than
anything you could offer. They will be non-planar. They will offer a
better turning radius than yours.

No, comparison would quickly reveal all this and thus I will leave you
with the last gasping denial. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Do you think I didn't realise what direction you was heading?
Look at mine not at his!
I remember after you did that work you turned on Chip and
everything he had to say. Heck it then got worse when the
group found out that he was jewish. That was mana for the
group and finally got the job done to get rid of him.
No matter how much shame you feel that will be part of
you forever. Can you remember the last time you said
something nice? That should take a week or so to think about.
You are such a miserable person, always pushing good aside
for the benefit of evil.If your page is the only thing
you can point to as to what you have achieved in the
last twenty years you are indeed in a sorry state.

Hey you two, stop it,
this is my thread about EZNEC modeling and Flag antennas. :-)
Mike- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Noted and understood. Its national 'flag" day is it not?
With respect to EZNEC. MANA is much more ambedextrous than
Eznec. It does provide all the old stuff that eznec does
but it also supplies what is new from the last decade.
When you model using optimisation where the program
predetermines direction to take it opens up a whole
new world with respect to antenna design.
Ofcourse even optimisation is not new to antennas
which is why the program is offered for free to
amateurs. There is also a newsgroup based on MANA
so there is no need to search the amateur newsgroups
for the author to report bugs.
I don't think eznec can match it in any way, even
with the allowable number of segments used let
alone the number of variables available. If you
want to design an antenna that is in equilibrium
so that focussed radiation is denied it is just
one type of antenna design that cannot be met
using eznec. A lot of time has passed by since
eznec came on the scene as well as many changes
and additions with respect to antenna programs
so why impede your antenna learning by using
old technology? It certainly cannot be the cost.
Art