Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 24, 12:31*am, Roy Lewallen wrote:
tom wrote: Jeff I hate to support Art, but he did give the endpoint data in picture6. *I modeled it with eznec+ 5 and the pattern and gain are reasonably close to what he shows in the other "pictures". *Close considering he appears to be using mininec and if he includes conductor loss and real ground it's off a fair amount (I show 9.36 dBi gain). *I didn't run circular, and doubt that it has much in the way of circularity, which is kind of obvious from the elements. *Even though they are skewed in a way which he probably patented. tom K0TAR Picture6 data show equal horizontal and total gain, which means it's purely horizontally polarized in the direction of the analysis. That's also consistent with equal CW and CCW (or right and left hand) circular components, which mean polarization (again in the direction of the analysis) is purely linear. Roy Lewallen, W7EL I am a bit lost on the above response basically on the use of the term purely linear. Could you please explain your emphasis on purely linear in your analysis. Does it in any way point to an error in the model |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Lowe HF225 DC socket polarity? | Shortwave | |||
Polarity of 2SC1970 and 2SC1971 | Homebrew | |||
balun polarity? | Antenna | |||
BC-895 Reverse Polarity Mistake, Help! | Scanner |