Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hello John,
On 3 mar, 13:30, "J.B. Wood" wrote: On 03/02/2011 03:56 PM, Wimpie wrote: If in your opinion there do not exist antennas that generate a dominant magnetic or electric field (in the near field), then you are contradicting yourself, as you can't transfer energy with a magnetic field or electric field only. So your transformer also involves electric fields. Maybe you should look into the Poynting theorem. Hello, and that is correct. The Maxwell equations apply in all these cases. When solving such problems, especially when dealing with antennas, the total E-M field contains both reactive (electric/capacitive & magnetic/inductive) and radiative components, although certain components predominate depending on distance from the excited structure. When dealing with A.C. circuit problems where dimensions are a fraction of a wavelength, one can usually ignore the the radiative/propagation components. Why solve a problem with a sledgehammer when a small claw hammer is adequate? Wouldn't you rather use Ohm's law in such case rather than dealing with E and H fields? For example, the behavior of A.C. power power distribution lines operating a 60 Hz can certainly be modeled using transmission line equations but unless they're very long (implying a propagation delay), a lumped-element/circuit approach is much more easily dealt with (lumped lines. And yes, I'm intimately familiar with the Poynting theorem and its derivation. (The designers of the CFA obviously weren't). Whoops, we have to be careful to not getting involved in a new discussion, but I agree on your statement regarding that "special" antenna and the statements regarding whether or not to use distributed versus lumped circuit approach. When a noise source is about 5..10m away from an 3.6 MHz antenna, the coupling of that noise source towards a "magnetic" loop antenna may be different from the coupling towards an "electric" antenna, though both antennas may produce the same far field radiation. This is not from a textbook, but from experience (I am also working in power electronics). There's no such thing as "magnetic" and "electric" antennas. That is why I added the word "dominant", as you can't transfer energy with H or E only and we were discussing small antennas as shown on Norberts website. One may imagine the electrically small magnetic loop antenna as the primary of a transformer where there is no secondary coil in the reactive field. The RF leakage (far field radiation) by accident hit the antenna of another amateur. The marketing departments of antenna vendors or others can call these whatever they want but they can't change the laws of physics. Now, if one dimensions a loop antenna or dipole antenna small enough (compared to a wavelength, one obtains a magnetic or electric dipole, respectively. Such dipoles (note the absence of the word "antenna") are a theoretical concept but can be applied in practice to those structures having electrically small radiators/interceptors. I fully agree with you on the far field statements, but when you live in an apartment (where significant spurious emission from home equipment are in the near field of your 3.6 MHz antenna), a so-called magnetic loop antenna may behave different (w.r.t. a short "electric" dipole). It can be worse or better. Many radio amateurs know this from experiments, without knowing the EM theory behind it. Hey, I'm a fellow Ham and well aware of the contributions over the years by hams to antenna design. Many times, however, established electromagnetic theory is distorted to match the perceived observation. I agree on the above. Let I mention the two letters "EH" in addition to your three-letter combination to avoid a new discussion... In the case of noise immunity I would discuss the size of the victim antenna, the antenna type (e.g. loop or dipole), antenna dimensions, orientation and proximity wrt the offending noise source, and whether the victim antenna is shielded and balanced. Unless one is referring to an electrically small antenna treated as a magnetic or electric dipole, typing an antenna as "magnetic" or "electric" is meaningless. With kind regards, Wim PA3DJS www.tetech.nl |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
SBS-1 - information. Does anyone have any experience with ? | Scanner | |||
Material of wi does it affect a loop antenna's performance? | Antenna | |||
Magnetic Loop !!! | Antenna | |||
Dipole vs. Delta loop vs. Quad loop -pratical experience | Antenna |