Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() The answer here, as it is to so may binary questions, is that it behaves in some ways like one, some ways like the other, and some ways like neither. .. .. .. Roy Lewallen, W7EL If one were to find lossless material (superconductors?) for the short antenna and it's corresponding matching network, what would happen as the antenna became shorter and shorter compared with the half-wave dipole? Would it simply approach an isotropic radiator? Alan |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alan Peake wrote:
If one were to find lossless material (superconductors?) for the short antenna and it's corresponding matching network, what would happen as the antenna became shorter and shorter compared with the half-wave dipole? Would it simply approach an isotropic radiator? Alan If room temperature super-conductors were available, do you even realize the shape antennas would take? My gawd man, share some of that material here! The thought alone is inspiring! Regards, JS |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() John Smith wrote: Alan Peake wrote: If one were to find lossless material (superconductors?) for the short antenna and it's corresponding matching network, what would happen as the antenna became shorter and shorter compared with the half-wave dipole? Would it simply approach an isotropic radiator? Alan If room temperature super-conductors were available, do you even realize the shape antennas would take? My gawd man, share some of that material here! The thought alone is inspiring! Regards, JS Don't know what shape it would be but I'm sure I wouldn't recognize it! Alan |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alan Peake wrote:
"---what would happen as the antenna became shorter and shorter compared with the half-wave dipole?" Terman answers that question on page 871 of his 1955 opus: "The directive gain of the elementary doublet =1.5." For a resonant wire of 0.5 lambda, the gain is 1.64. There`s not much difference in directivity as the doublet shrinks to a vanishingly small size. The gains shown are power ratios, not dB`s. Comparison antenna is the isotropic of which Terman says: "Although an isotropic radiator of coherent waves does not exist because it cannot satisfy Maxwell`s equations, the properties of such an imaginary antenna are easily visualized, and the concept of an isotropic radiator is often found useful in the analysis of antenna systems." (Page 871 in the 1955 opus.) Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alan Peake wrote:
If one were to find lossless material (superconductors?) for the short antenna and it's corresponding matching network, what would happen as the antenna became shorter and shorter compared with the half-wave dipole? Would it simply approach an isotropic radiator? Alan No. The answer can be found in any antenna textbook, because the lossless short dipole is a very good platform to illustrate a number of principles without the confounding additional consequences of loss. Briefly, -- The pattern of an infinitesimally short dipole is very similar to that of a half wave dipole. The difference is due to the triangular current distribution of the short dipole as opposed to the sinusoidal current distribution of the half wave dipole. Because the patterns are very similar and both antennas radiate all the applied power, the gain of the two antennas is nearly the same. The short dipole's pattern is a little fatter so it has slightly -- about a half dB -- less gain. But the pattern of even an infinitesimally short dipole retains the basic two-lobed dipole shape with around 1.7 dB gain over isotropic in its favored directions. -- The input resistance of the very short lossless dipole is very low and the capacitive reactance very high. The resistance approaches zero and the reactance negative infinity as the length approaches zero. There's no comparison to an isotropic radiator, since the latter is a purely fictional source with no even theoretical physical realization and therefore no definable input characteristics. -- The Q of the short dipole is very high, so the reactance varies very rapidly with frequency. A matched short antenna would have an extremely narrow bandwidth. Most of these properties of the dipoles can easily be observed with the free EZNEC demo program from http://eznec.com, and much more information about the properties of the short lossless dipole can be found in any antenna text. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Lewallen wrote:
... -- The Q of the short dipole is very high, so the reactance varies very rapidly with frequency. A matched short antenna would have an extremely narrow bandwidth. ... Roy Lewallen, W7EL And, here is where a DLM antenna is nice, keep the coils of low Q and bandwidth is "surprisingly wide." Regards, JS |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4 Dec, 01:28, John Smith wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote: ... -- The Q of the short dipole is very high, so the reactance varies very rapidly with frequency. A matched short antenna would have an extremely narrow bandwidth. ... Roy Lewallen, W7EL And, here is where a DLM antenna is nice, keep the coils of low Q and bandwidth is "surprisingly wide." Regards, JS Yup, My 160M antenna came at at a resistive 200 ohm plus resonance and with a bit of fiddling I now connect the coax direct and cover the whole band. Not sure if I would have been better off with keeping the high resistive impedance and using a transformer but snow is on the way so beggars can't be choosers. Regards Art KB9MZ........XG (uk) |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Roy Lewallen wrote: Alan Peake wrote: If one were to find lossless material (superconductors?) for the short antenna and it's corresponding matching network, what would happen as the antenna became shorter and shorter compared with the half-wave dipole? Would it simply approach an isotropic radiator? Alan No. The answer can be found in any antenna textbook, .... etc. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Thanks Roy. Unfortunately, since I retired, I no longer have access to Jasik, Kraus etc. So, thanks for the answer. I should have realised that a dipole of any length is still a dipole and as such will not radiate off it's ends. Mind you, Eznec shows the average dipole, less than half-wave above ground, goes pretty close to an isotropic radiator for all practical purposes ![]() Alan |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alan Peake wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote: Alan Peake wrote: If one were to find lossless material (superconductors?) for the short antenna and it's corresponding matching network, what would happen as the antenna became shorter and shorter compared with the half-wave dipole? Would it simply approach an isotropic radiator? Alan No. The answer can be found in any antenna textbook, ... etc. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Thanks Roy. Unfortunately, since I retired, I no longer have access to Jasik, Kraus etc. So, thanks for the answer. I should have realised that a dipole of any length is still a dipole and as such will not radiate off it's ends. Mind you, Eznec shows the average dipole, less than half-wave above ground, goes pretty close to an isotropic radiator for all practical purposes ![]() Alan --------------- You appear to be extrapolating, if I see this correctly, that since all of the radiation is believed to come from one end of the dipole, then the rest of the antenna is merely acting as the necessary reactances and resistance needed to obtain the proper feedpoint impedance at a given frequency. True? Following that line of reasoning, if the need for the aggregate reactances/resistances can be eliminated via superconducting elements, one will have just a single point source of radiation. Or, what is commonly known as an isotropic radiator. I suspect that the plasma antenna fellows are contemplating this too. Ed, NM2K |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ed Cregger wrote:
You appear to be extrapolating, if I see this correctly, that since all of the radiation is believed to come from one end of the dipole, then the rest of the antenna is merely acting as the necessary reactances and resistance needed to obtain the proper feedpoint impedance at a given frequency. True? No. It's not true that all the radiation "comes from one end of the dipole". Extrapolation from that mistaken premise will lead to invalid conclusions. Following that line of reasoning, if the need for the aggregate reactances/resistances can be eliminated via superconducting elements, one will have just a single point source of radiation. Or, what is commonly known as an isotropic radiator. I suspect that the plasma antenna fellows are contemplating this too. And there's the first one. . . Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Nutty Antenna Idea -- Complete with Rhetorical Questions | Antenna | |||
Novel idea to turn an antenna | Antenna | |||
PC controlled reciever --- good idea? bad idea? or a just plain ugly one? | Scanner | |||
Weird antenna idea # 492 | Shortwave | |||
Opinions on Antenna | CB |