Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:07:05 -0800 (PST), Richard Fry
wrote: On Nov 28, 12:51*pm, Richard Clark where the question remains at: where did you get ...72 mV/m from? It is evident your field quote is NOT from this specific Mininec r-f ground model of yours above. Can you not view the screen clip at the link I posted showing this? Why do you keep asking? Because in a commercial release, suitable to professional and scholarly reporting, it is obviously locked out as an available option - by design and documented as so. A screen shot does not describe your actions. You need only explicitly state that when you selected the mini-nec ground model, that you had the NF button available and you selected it. If such is the case, it is a bug in Roy's demo - caveat emptor. I don't do research with demo applications. The long and short of it is that what your poor model reveals is a departure from the data found in the BL&E paper "Ground Systems as a Factor in Antenna Efficiency." You 1. do not have a construction of radials of any type; 2. do not have a radiator sized to their specification; 3. employ an engine (mini-nec) which is poorly suited to the task; 4. excite the model at a frequency not supported in data in BL&E; 5. fail to note the documented advisories about near field operation below 3MHz when such analysis is available. There is no point in asking for how to "fix it" when your model is irreconcilably crippled. Using a demo version of EZNEC is not suited to the task. You couldn't even use my model as it is constructed with fine granularity that exceeds the capacity of EZNEC, and supported only with EZNEC+. There are alternatives that are free, and unlimited in their segment counts available which is necessary for a proper analysis. Caveat emptor still prevails, and you get the quality of support you pay for. I would "suggest" given all the cautions, contrarian advisories offered, and warnings direct from the tool's author, that their cumulative effect would seem to doom you to disappointment if you demand something better than several percent concurrence to the data supplied in the BL&E paper "Ground Systems as a Factor in Antenna Efficiency" when abstracted to other applications. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Elevation Patterns of Ground Mounted Vertical Monopoles | Antenna | |||
FS: Hy-Gain AV-640 Vertical (Mint) | Swap | |||
Vertical ant gain vs No radials | Antenna | |||
FS: Hy-Gain AV-640 Vertical (Mint) | Swap | |||
1/4 wave vertical vs. loaded vertical | Antenna |