Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Does reactance of dipole depend on diameter ??
Roy Lewallen wrote:
But I assume you are talking of something like NEC which breaks antennas into segments. Yes. You can find a good description of the method of moments in the second and later editions of Kraus. The fundamental equation can only be solved numerically, and the method of moments, used by NEC and MININEC, is an efficient way to do it. Since you clearly know more about this stuff than me, do you know of the best freely available software for this which works under Unix? (I use Sun's Solaris for 99% of the things I do, including sending this message. I use Solaris on my laptop too, rather than Windows). Hence I'm almost certainly looking for source code in either C, C++ or Fortran. Anything that works under Linux would almost certainly be able to be compiled for Solaris without too much effort. I found this page: http://www.si-list.net/swindex.html which has some source. I downloaded one http://www.si-list.net/NEC_Archives/necpp-1.1.1.tar.gz It would not compile immediately on my Sun. gcc 4.3.1 complained about some ambiguous code. gcc 3.4.1 did not, so I got past that bit. It then tries to link with the 'blas', 'atlas' and 'lapack_atlas' libraries, none of which my Sun has. I then swapped to the Sun C/C++ and Fortran compilers, removed references to 'blas', 'atlas' and 'lapack_atlas' , and replaced them with 'sublibperf' which is the optimised library on Solaris. That worked ok, and I had an executable: $ ./nec2++ usage: nec2++ [-iinput-file-name] [-ooutput-file-name] -g: print maximum gain to stdout. -b: Perform NEC++ Benchmark. -h: print this usage information and exit. -v: print nec2++ version number and exit. I've not done any more than that at this point, but proved it will compile on Solaris with little effort. Anyway, if you have any recommendations for the best freely available Unix/Linux code, I would be interested. Hallen's integral equation is exact, but it's not a formula, since you can't plug numbers into one side and get a result on the other. Nor can it be solved in closed form at all. That's why so much work was done on approximate solutions and on developing numerical solution methods. Feel free to write your own program to solve it, but such programs have existed for decades and have been verified countless times as well as being highly optimized. OK, I understand that. Getting the resistance is pretty straightforward once you assume the shape of the current distribution. Assume some arbitrary current at the feedpoint which, along with the assumed current distribution, gives you the field strength in any direction. With the impedance of free space, this directly gives the power density. Integrate the power density over all space to get the total radiated power. Then you know how much power is radiated per ampere of current at the feedpoint, from which you can calculate the feedpoint resistance. This calculation is done in all editions of Kraus, I'm sure; I have only the first and second, but I can't imagine it was deleted in later ones. Be careful when reading Kraus, however. Unlike many authors, he uses a uniform, rather than triangular, current distribution for his short elemental dipole examples. This is equivalent to a very short dipole with huge end hats, not just a plain short dipole. The half wavelength and other dipoles in his text are conventional. I think I found what I was looking for in either Kraus or Balanis last night. The book is beside the bed, and as my wife is still asleep I'm not going to look for it. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Does reactance of dipole depend on diameter ??
Dave wrote:
Since you clearly know more about this stuff than me, do you know of the best freely available software for this which works under Unix? (I use Sun's Solaris for 99% of the things I do, including sending this message. I use Solaris on my laptop too, rather than Windows). Hence I'm almost certainly looking for source code in either C, C++ or Fortran. Anything that works under Linux would almost certainly be able to be compiled for Solaris without too much effort. I found this page: http://www.si-list.net/swindex.html which has some source. I downloaded one http://www.si-list.net/NEC_Archives/necpp-1.1.1.tar.gz . . . Sorry, my knowledge doesn't extend to that of programs suitable for Unix or Linux. The "Unofficial NEC archives" site is the best I know of for various compilations. Hopefully some of the other readers can help you out. My program, EZNEC, has been reported to run under Linux using some versions of the wine Windows emulator, but not with others. You'll have a lot more to choose from if you can emulate Windows. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Does reactance of dipole depend on diameter ??
Roy Lewallen wrote:
Dave wrote: Since you clearly know more about this stuff than me, do you know of the best freely available software for this which works under Unix? (I use Sun's Solaris for 99% of the things I do, including sending this message. I use Solaris on my laptop too, rather than Windows). Hence I'm almost certainly looking for source code in either C, C++ or Fortran. Anything that works under Linux would almost certainly be able to be compiled for Solaris without too much effort. I found this page: http://www.si-list.net/swindex.html which has some source. I downloaded one http://www.si-list.net/NEC_Archives/necpp-1.1.1.tar.gz . . . Sorry, my knowledge doesn't extend to that of programs suitable for Unix or Linux. The "Unofficial NEC archives" site is the best I know of for various compilations. Hopefully some of the other readers can help you out. Thank you. My program, EZNEC, has been reported to run under Linux using some versions of the wine Windows emulator, but not with others. You'll have a lot more to choose from if you can emulate Windows. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Thanks a lot. I'm just a bit anti-windows myself. Fed up with all the hassle of viruses etc. The CPUs in this machine are not even capable or running Windows, as they are not AMD/Intel compatible. I do of course have access to Windows machines, and might well check out your code later. I assume analysing a simple dipole will be trivual and not require a huge amount of work. But you have helped me understand the differences in impedance between the different sets of data I have seen, which was my main concern. For the immediate future at least, I am not going to do any numerical analysis, but I might well look at that for a later date. Dave |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Does reactance of dipole depend on diameter ??
Dave wrote:
I wish to know if the reactance of a dipole that is physically 0.5000 wavelengths in length depends on the diameter of the wire or not. Yes, it does. I know a dipole 0.5 wavelength long is not resonate, but inductive so you need to shorten it a few percent to bring it to resonance. I know the length at resonance depends on wire diameter. But I'm interested if the reactance does very with wire diameter when the antenna is physically 0.5 wavelengths long, which means it will be somewhat inductive. yes, it does vary K X05 X045 ------------------------- What one notices is: 1) Reactance for 0.45 lambda is very sensitive to radius, varying by more than 200 Ohms as K changes from 10 (fat elements) to 1000000 (thin elements). 2) The value for a dipole 0.5 lambda in length changes much less (only 6 Ohms), but it *does* change. 3) For infinitely thin elements (K very large), the reactance of a dipole 0.5 lambda in length looks as though it is never going to go much above 41.2 Ohms. Certainly not as high as 42 Ohms. Now I compare that to a professional book I have: Balanis C. A., “Antenna Theory – Analysis and Design”, (1982), Harper and Row. ISBN 0-06-0404458-2 There is a formula in Balanis' book for reactance of a dipole of arbitrary radius and length, in terms of sine and cosine integrals. It's hard to write out, but the best I can do gives: Define: eta=120 Pi k=2/lambda reactance = (eta/(4*Pi)) (2 SinIntegral[k l] + Cos[k l]*(2 SinIntegral[k l] - SinIntegral[2 k l]) - Sin[k l]*(2 CosIntegral[k l] - CosIntegral[2 k l] - CosIntegral[(2 k a^2)/l])); where 'a' is the radius. (It's in Mathematica notation) What is interesting about that is that for a length of 0.5 lambda, the reactance does not depend on wavelength at all - it is fixed at 42.5445 Ohms. So two different books give two quite different results. Numerically evaluating the above formula gives this data. K X05 X045 ------------------------- 10 42.5 35.7183 Does anyone have any comments? Any idea if Balanis's work is more accurate? It is more up to date, but perhaps its an approximation and the amateur radio book is more accurate. (The ham book seems quite well researched, and is not full of the voodoo that appears in a lot of ham books). Balanis is giving the usual closed form expression for self Z.. I think the original is from Schelkunoff or King.. I don't have my copy of Kraus in front of me so I can't check. Perhaps Lawson is using a different approximation? Some formulas make the assumption of a sinusoidal current distribution, others are more refined. BTW, I'm also looking for an exact formula for input resistance of a dipole of arbitrary length. I know is 73.13 Ohms when 0.5 wavelengths long, but I'm not sure exactly how much it varies when the length changes (I believe it is not a lot). 73.1 +j42.5 to be more accurate.. "exact" as in analytical expression with no error? Or good to less than a percent? Accounting for resistance of the element? As a practical matter, I use NEC for this kind of thing (which does take into account resistance, etc.) You can set it up to zap out a table that you can then interpolate into, for instance. However, there are a variety of formulas that one can use. I suggest taking a look at Orfanidis's book http://www.ece.rutgers.edu/~orfanidi/ewa/ Chapter 16 is probably the one you want. Figure 16.3.1 for instance. As you noted, X varies a lot more slowly for fat elements (which is to be expected.. ). Chapter 22 is also quite handy. Equation 22.2.10 is the expression for Z11, which is an integration of F(z), given in 22.2.11. The author makes the point "In evaluating the self impedance of an antenna with a small radius, the integrand F(z) varies rapidly around z = 0. To maintain accuracy in the integration, we split the integration interval into three subintervals, as we mentioned in Sec. 21.10" He has matlab procedures and functions for most of them.. imped.m is probably the one you want. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Does reactance of dipole depend on diameter ??
Dave wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote: Since you clearly know more about this stuff than me, do you know of the best freely available software for this which works under Unix? (I use Sun's Solaris for 99% of the things I do, including sending this message. I use Solaris on my laptop too, rather than Windows). Hence I'm almost certainly looking for source code in either C, C++ or Fortran. Anything that works under Linux would almost certainly be able to be compiled for Solaris without too much effort. FORTRAN would be the language of choice (since that's what NEC was written *and validated* in.. one would be concerned about a C translation, although I'm sure there are C versions out there which have been validated) It then tries to link with the 'blas', 'atlas' and 'lapack_atlas' libraries, none of which my Sun has. There should be versions out there that don't link with the matrix math packages. Anyway, if you have any recommendations for the best freely available Unix/Linux code, I would be interested. What you've got is probably as good as anything else, especially if you're just looking for a table of Z vs length and diameter. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Does reactance of dipole depend on diameter ??
Dave writes:
Since you clearly know more about this stuff than me, do you know of the best freely available software for this which works under Unix? (I use Sun's Solaris for 99% of the things I do, including sending this message. I use Solaris on my laptop too, rather than Windows). Hence I'm almost certainly looking for source code in either C, C++ or Fortran. Anything that works under Linux would almost certainly be able to be compiled for Solaris without too much effort. I found this page: NEC-2 can be built for Linux, and binaries are available for some distributions. I am sure NEC-4 also can, if you get a license. However, I have seen strange results come out of NEC-2 on Debian Linux. Looked like numerical instability, and could be caused by a problem in the toolchain. I don't think these binaries are used much, so they don't receive the amount of tender loving care that they deserve. 73 LA4RT Jon, Trondheim, Norway |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Does reactance of dipole depend on diameter ??
Jim Lux wrote:
Dave wrote: Roy Lewallen wrote: Since you clearly know more about this stuff than me, do you know of the best freely available software for this which works under Unix? (I use Sun's Solaris for 99% of the things I do, including sending this message. I use Solaris on my laptop too, rather than Windows). Hence I'm almost certainly looking for source code in either C, C++ or Fortran. Anything that works under Linux would almost certainly be able to be compiled for Solaris without too much effort. FORTRAN would be the language of choice (since that's what NEC was written *and validated* in.. one would be concerned about a C translation, although I'm sure there are C versions out there which have been validated) Good point. It then tries to link with the 'blas', 'atlas' and 'lapack_atlas' libraries, none of which my Sun has. There should be versions out there that don't link with the matrix math packages. The Sun library 'libsunperf' has all the functions of blas, atlas and lapack_atlas (well at least alls those used by NEC). I simply needed to link against that one library, rather than the other 3, and I soon had a n executable. I've not used it yet, as I have more pressing things to do. That sun library should be highly optimised for the UltraSPARC processors in my workstation. Anyway, if you have any recommendations for the best freely available Unix/Linux code, I would be interested. What you've got is probably as good as anything else, especially if you're just looking for a table of Z vs length and diameter. Thank you for that. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Balun vs reactance | Antenna | |||
VSWR Meter and reactance | Homebrew | |||
Insulation diameter vs Impedance OR how to get 20dBi out of a short Dipole | Antenna | |||
Read this, your freedom may depend on it! | Shortwave |