Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 29, 5:35*pm, "Richard Fry" wrote:
Quoting from Antenna Engineering Handbook, 2nd Edition by Johnson and Jasik, page 13-18: "For a normal-mode helix whose dimensions are small compared to a wavelength, the current distribution along the helix is approximately sinusoidal." But John, a helix that is 180 degrees long electrically is not small. It is electrically double the size of a 1/4WL monopole. Therefore it is unclear as to the source of this belief that current would be maximum at the center of "1/2-WL" helix whose end-end length is 1/4-WL. *In reality the current maximum would be at the base of the radiator, just as it is for a 1/4-wave linear monopole. Not true. Any monopole that is electrically 180 degrees long will have the current maximum point in the middle and a normal mode helix is no exception. You can easily model such with EZNEC. For any 180 degree antenna, at the feedpoint, the reflected voltage will arrive in phase with the forward voltage. The reflected current will arrive 180 degrees out of phase with the forward current. Zfp = (Vfor+Vref)/(Ifor-Iref) is a current minimum Take your NEC helical model and adjust the frequency to approximately double the resonant frequency and take a look at the current distribution. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 30, 7:01*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Mar 29, 5:35*pm, "Richard Fry" wrote: But John, Richard, I'm sorry. I have no idea why I typed "John" there. Maybe a senior moment? -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Cecil Moore" wrote
Take your NEC helical model and adjust the frequency to approximately double the resonant frequency and take a look at the current distribution. I have already done an illustration based on the currents in the NEC comparison posted earlier, showing a helix and a linear monopole each about 6 degrees in aperture (link below). This link shows that even though the length of wire used in the helix is 3.14 X the length used in the linear monopole, the current distribution along their apertures essentially is the same, as will be the directivity and radiation pattern of both versions. This same equivalence would apply to the current distribution, directivity and pattern of a linear, 1/4-WL monopole and a helically-wound monopole that was 1/4-WL in aperture, but contained 1/2-WL of coiled wire. http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h8...le_Current.gif |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 30, 10:28*am, "Richard Fry" wrote:
I have already done an illustration based on the currents in the NEC comparison posted earlier, showing a helix and a linear monopole each about 6 degrees in aperture (link below). What we have here is a failure to communicate. Please forget about your previous posting. We are not talking about 6 deg. electrically short helicals. We are talking about comparing an 180 degree electrically long monopole to a 90 degree long RESONANT monopole. Here's how to accomplish what we are talking about: 1. Wind a helical that is 90 degrees long, i.e. the feedpoint impedance is R1+j0. That helical is 1/4WL long electrically and resonant. It may be ~1/8WL (45 deg) long physically. 2. Now increase the frequency until the helical is 180 degrees long electrically. At something like double the frequency, it will be 1/2WL long electrically and the feedpoint impedance will be R2+j0 where R2R1. It may be ~1/4WL long physically. John said his 180 degree helical outperformed his resonant 90 degree helical. His statement has nothing to do with electrically short helical monopoles because they are resonant. The current maximum for a 90 degree resonant helical will be at the base feedpoint just as it is for a 90 degree stub. The current maximum for a 180 degree helical will be halfway up the antenna just as it is halfway up a 180 degree stub. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cecil Moore wrote:
On Mar 29, 5:35 pm, "Richard Fry" wrote: Quoting from Antenna Engineering Handbook, 2nd Edition by Johnson and Jasik, page 13-18: "For a normal-mode helix whose dimensions are small compared to a wavelength, the current distribution along the helix is approximately sinusoidal." But John, a helix that is 180 degrees long electrically is not small. It is electrically double the size of a 1/4WL monopole. "small" in Kraus's book means "physically" small, not electrically small. Therefore it is unclear as to the source of this belief that current would be maximum at the center of "1/2-WL" helix whose end-end length is 1/4-WL. In reality the current maximum would be at the base of the radiator, just as it is for a 1/4-wave linear monopole. Take your NEC helical model and adjust the frequency to approximately double the resonant frequency and take a look at the current distribution. This is no different than taking the "non-helical" antenna and feeding it at twice the frequency. I would imagine that the pattern of the helically loaded and the unloaded will be quite similar at ANY frequency, until you get to where the *diameter* of the assembly starts to be a significant fraction of a wavelength. What might change more is the resistive losses, although I suspect they'll scale in proportion too. Whether you've strung 10 meters, 20 meters or 30 meters of wire in a physical 10 meter length doesn't change the *radiation* properties a huge amount. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 30, 11:31*am, Jim Lux wrote:
I would imagine that the pattern of the helically loaded and the unloaded will be quite similar at ANY frequency, until you get to where the *diameter* of the assembly starts to be a significant fraction of a wavelength. A helical longer than a few degrees will exhibit transmission line effects. A helical that is electrically 180 degrees long will have essentially the same standing wave current envelope as a 180 degree long open-circuit transmission line stub. EZNEC agrees. John said his 180 degree electrically long helical outperformed his electrically long 90 degree helical. The standing-wave current envelope for the 90 degree helical is a cosine with the current maximum at the feedpoint. The standing-wave current envelope for the 180 degree long helical is a sine wave with the current maximum point in the middle of the helical. They would not have the same radiation patterns. EZNEC agrees. Again, I have modeled these conditions using EZNEC and I am reporting the results. The "Currents" button will give the current magnitude/ phase for each segment in the helical. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Cecil Moore" wrote
The standing-wave current envelope for the 180 degree long helical is a sine wave with the current maximum point in the middle of the helical. That is true ONLY if the end-to-end length (height) of a normal-mode helical monopole occupies about 180 degrees of a free-space wavelength. If that helix occupies only about 90 degrees of a free-space wavelength, then no matter how much linear wire length is contained in the coils of the helix, that helical radiator will have the radiation resistance, pattern and directivity characteristics of a 90-degree linear monopole of the same end-to-end height. The length of coiled wire in a helix of any physical length makes very little difference in the current distribution along its aperture, its directivity, or its radiation patterns. Please forget about your previous posting. We are not talking about 6 deg. electrically short helicals. Rather than suggesting that my previous posting(s) on this subject should be forgotten, perhaps they should be re-read -- especially the link to http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h8...le_Current.gif . |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
P.S.
Both linear, and helical normal-mode monopoles of ~6 degrees physical aperture (and less) can be made resonant at the operating frequency via a suitable inductance placed either in the monopole itself, or at its feedpoint. But resonance so achieved does NOT mean that such monopole radiators will have a very useful amount of radiation resistance, or that such a resonant condition equates to the performance of a radiator that is resonant without the need for such an additional inductance. This reality appears to have been overlooked in some of the earlier posts in this thread. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 30, 5:58*pm, "Richard Fry" wrote:
If that helix occupies only about 90 degrees of a free-space wavelength, then no matter how much linear wire length is contained in the coils of the helix, that helical radiator will have the radiation resistance, pattern and directivity characteristics of a 90-degree linear monopole of the same end-to-end height. I just modeled a 5.25' long helical using EZNEC at the 270 degree 3rd harmonic frequency of 26.5 MHz. Both helical and whip are modeled as lossless. If I understand you correctly, the 270 degree helical should have a TOA equal to a 5.25' whip. The TOAs differ by 6 degrees. The maximum gain of the 5.25' whip is -0.25 dBi. The maximum gain of the 270 degree helical of the same length is +0.29 dBi, a difference of 0.54 dB. The 5.25' whip is1/4WL resonant at 45.3 MHz with a maximum gain of -0.25 dBi at a TOA of 27 degrees. The 5.25' helical at 45.3 MHz has a gain of -3.13 dBi at a TOA of 24 degrees, a difference of 2.88 dBi and 3 degrees. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Cecil Moore" wrote:
I just modeled a 5.25' long helical using EZNEC at the 270 degree 3rd harmonic frequency of 26.5 MHz. Both helical and whip are modeled as lossless. If I understand you correctly, the 270 degree helical ... A normal-mode helical with a radiating aperture of 5.25' is not a "270 degree" radiator on 26.5 MHz. It is a ~ 51 degree radiator on that frequency. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Fractal Sleeve for Monopoles? | Antenna | |||
Magnetic monopoles | Antenna | |||
Helically-wound Monopoles | Antenna | |||
Vertical dipole, helically wound - comments? | Antenna | |||
End Effect on folded dipoles/monopoles? | Antenna |