|
New antenna technology???
Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below?
http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Article text below --------------------------------------------- Department of Communications/News Bureau 22 Davis Hall, 10 Lippitt Road, Kingston, RI 02881 Phone: 401-874-2116 Fax: 401-874-7872 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- URI physics employee invents new antenna technology Media Contact: Jan Wenzel, 401-874-2116 KINGSTON, R.I. -- June 2, 2004 -- Rob Vincent, an employee in the University of Rhode Island's Physics Department, proves the adage that necessity is the mother of invention. An amateur radio operator since he was 14, Vincent has always lived in houses situated on small lots. Because he couldn't erect a large antenna on a confined property, he has been continually challenged over the years to find a way to get better reception. "I was always tinkering in the basement. Thank goodness, my parents were tolerant. I can still remember my poor father driving up our driveway after a hard day's work to see wires wrapped around the house," Vincent recalls. "The Holy Grail of antenna technology is to create a small antenna with high efficiency and wide bandwidth," explains Vincent. "According to current theory, you have to give up one of the three-size, efficiency, or bandwidth-to achieve any one of the other two." After decades of experimentation, combined with a 30-year engineering career and Yankee ingenuity, Vincent has invented a revolutionary antenna technology. The distributed loaded monopole antennas are smaller, produce high efficiency, and retain good to excellent bandwidth. And they have multiple applications. With this technology it will be possible to double, at minimum, the range of walkie-talkies used by police, fire, and other municipal personnel. Naval ships, baby monitors, and portable antennas for military use are other applications. An antenna could be mounted on a chip in a cell phone and be applied to wireless local area networks. Another application deals with radio frequency identification, which is expected someday to replace the barcode system. "It could even make the Dick Tracy wrist radio with all the features, such as Internet access, a possibility," Vincent says. The inventor pursued his quest to build a better antenna in earnest eight years ago when he and his significant other moved into a house situated on a 50-foot by 100-foot lot in Warwick. There was nothing on the commercial market that could fit the lot that would provide the performance Vincent needed to be heard in distant lands and that would be acceptable to his neighbors. All the small antennas being sold were inefficient and lacked bandwidth, which resulted in low performance and high frustration. Vincent looked at the techniques that were currently used to reduce antenna size and realized something was missing in the way everyone was approaching the problem. He began to model various combinations into a computer program called MathCad. His first attempt produced a 21 MHz band antenna that was 18 inches high. Normally, antennas for this band are 12 to 24 feet high. Vincent installed the antenna in his back yard. The legal limit that amateurs can operate is 1,000 watts with the norm being 100 watts. The amateur radio operator experimented with 5 to 10 watts. He reached a station in Chile and made contacts in various European countries. Meanwhile he kept adding power until it reached 100 watts. That's when things suddenly went bad. Walking outside in the backyard, he understood why. The antenna had melted. After examining the molten matter, Vincent wasn't discouraged. This was only a small model and not designed to handle much power. The part of the antenna that failed proved to be the key to the design. After analyzing the failure, Vincent realized that he was able to transform a lot of current along the antenna with even relatively low power. "Antennas radiate by setting up large amounts of current flow through various parts of their structure," he says. "The larger the current the more radiation and the better the output of the antenna." Vincent went back to the drawing board and continued to improve the technology. Relying on his nearly 30 years at Raytheon Co. and at KVH Industries in Middletown R.I which provided him with a diversified background in electronics and electronic systems, Vincent overcame a myriad of problems and succeeded. He established three test sites for various prototypes. Antennas were placed in Westport, Mass. in a salt marsh, the best ground for transmission and reception. Another set of antennas were placed on rocky ground in Cumberland, R.I., the worst kind of site, and at a Warwick site which is in between the two. The antennas, which resemble flagpoles, worked well at all locations. Tests confirmed that Vincent has created antennas at one third to one ninth of their full size counterparts. Normally smaller antennas are only 8 to 15 percent efficient. Vincent's antennas achieved 80 to 100 percent efficiency as compared to the larger antennas. A patent is pending on Vincent's technology. The inventor has made the University of Rhode Island and its Physics Department partners that will benefit from any revenue his invention earns. "The University and its Physics Department has been very supportive and given me time and space to work on this project," says Vincent who was recently presented the 2004 Outstanding Intellectual Property Award by URI's Research Office. "I couldn' t have done this without the University's support. It's only fair that it share in the profits." |
another loaded vertical. more details are required to see if its another
EH, CFA, or some other variation of a standard loading arrangement. "Chuck...K1KW" wrote in message news:0wNvc.39192$3x.31853@attbi_s54... Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Article text below --------------------------------------------- Department of Communications/News Bureau 22 Davis Hall, 10 Lippitt Road, Kingston, RI 02881 Phone: 401-874-2116 Fax: 401-874-7872 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ---- URI physics employee invents new antenna technology Media Contact: Jan Wenzel, 401-874-2116 KINGSTON, R.I. -- June 2, 2004 -- Rob Vincent, an employee in the University of Rhode Island's Physics Department, proves the adage that necessity is the mother of invention. An amateur radio operator since he was 14, Vincent has always lived in houses situated on small lots. Because he couldn't erect a large antenna on a confined property, he has been continually challenged over the years to find a way to get better reception. "I was always tinkering in the basement. Thank goodness, my parents were tolerant. I can still remember my poor father driving up our driveway after a hard day's work to see wires wrapped around the house," Vincent recalls. "The Holy Grail of antenna technology is to create a small antenna with high efficiency and wide bandwidth," explains Vincent. "According to current theory, you have to give up one of the three-size, efficiency, or bandwidth-to achieve any one of the other two." After decades of experimentation, combined with a 30-year engineering career and Yankee ingenuity, Vincent has invented a revolutionary antenna technology. The distributed loaded monopole antennas are smaller, produce high efficiency, and retain good to excellent bandwidth. And they have multiple applications. With this technology it will be possible to double, at minimum, the range of walkie-talkies used by police, fire, and other municipal personnel. Naval ships, baby monitors, and portable antennas for military use are other applications. An antenna could be mounted on a chip in a cell phone and be applied to wireless local area networks. Another application deals with radio frequency identification, which is expected someday to replace the barcode system. "It could even make the Dick Tracy wrist radio with all the features, such as Internet access, a possibility," Vincent says. The inventor pursued his quest to build a better antenna in earnest eight years ago when he and his significant other moved into a house situated on a 50-foot by 100-foot lot in Warwick. There was nothing on the commercial market that could fit the lot that would provide the performance Vincent needed to be heard in distant lands and that would be acceptable to his neighbors. All the small antennas being sold were inefficient and lacked bandwidth, which resulted in low performance and high frustration. Vincent looked at the techniques that were currently used to reduce antenna size and realized something was missing in the way everyone was approaching the problem. He began to model various combinations into a computer program called MathCad. His first attempt produced a 21 MHz band antenna that was 18 inches high. Normally, antennas for this band are 12 to 24 feet high. Vincent installed the antenna in his back yard. The legal limit that amateurs can operate is 1,000 watts with the norm being 100 watts. The amateur radio operator experimented with 5 to 10 watts. He reached a station in Chile and made contacts in various European countries. Meanwhile he kept adding power until it reached 100 watts. That's when things suddenly went bad. Walking outside in the backyard, he understood why. The antenna had melted. After examining the molten matter, Vincent wasn't discouraged. This was only a small model and not designed to handle much power. The part of the antenna that failed proved to be the key to the design. After analyzing the failure, Vincent realized that he was able to transform a lot of current along the antenna with even relatively low power. "Antennas radiate by setting up large amounts of current flow through various parts of their structure," he says. "The larger the current the more radiation and the better the output of the antenna." Vincent went back to the drawing board and continued to improve the technology. Relying on his nearly 30 years at Raytheon Co. and at KVH Industries in Middletown R.I which provided him with a diversified background in electronics and electronic systems, Vincent overcame a myriad of problems and succeeded. He established three test sites for various prototypes. Antennas were placed in Westport, Mass. in a salt marsh, the best ground for transmission and reception. Another set of antennas were placed on rocky ground in Cumberland, R.I., the worst kind of site, and at a Warwick site which is in between the two. The antennas, which resemble flagpoles, worked well at all locations. Tests confirmed that Vincent has created antennas at one third to one ninth of their full size counterparts. Normally smaller antennas are only 8 to 15 percent efficient. Vincent's antennas achieved 80 to 100 percent efficiency as compared to the larger antennas. A patent is pending on Vincent's technology. The inventor has made the University of Rhode Island and its Physics Department partners that will benefit from any revenue his invention earns. "The University and its Physics Department has been very supportive and given me time and space to work on this project," says Vincent who was recently presented the 2004 Outstanding Intellectual Property Award by URI's Research Office. "I couldn' t have done this without the University's support. It's only fair that it share in the profits." |
Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below?
http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 No, they do not explain the "new" technology. This is the way the CFA and EH got started. Vincent has created a revolutionary antenna technology using Yankee ingenuity. Sorry, being from the South, I don't care for Yankees. More details are needed, but the antenna will be about like the CFA and EH. Build it (when you find out how). It will not work, just like the CFA and EH. 73 Gary N4AST |
"william ewald" wrote in message ... On 03 Jun 2004 23:47:08 GMT, (JGBOYLES) wrote: Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 No, they do not explain the "new" technology. This is the way the CFA and EH got started. Vincent has created a revolutionary antenna technology using Yankee ingenuity. Sorry, being from the South, I don't care for Yankees. More details are needed, but the antenna will be about like the CFA and EH. Build it (when you find out how). It will not work, just like the CFA and EH. 73 Gary N4AST "The University and its Physics Department has been very supportive and given me time and space to work on this project," says Vincent http://www.phys.uri.edu/people/rob.html who was recently presented the 2004 Outstanding Intellectual Property Award by URI's Research Office. "I couldn't have done this without the University's support. It's only fair that it share in the profits." Profits? What profits? An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with its claim of high efficiency. Tam/WB2TT |
Oh come on, he said it's revolutionary! You are being way too judgemental.
The melting probably had nothing to do with losses. I mean, it could have burst into flames due to corona igniting the revolutionary materials it was made of, and that's what melted it. Yeah, that's the ticket. tom K0TAR Tam/WB2TT wrote: An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with its claim of high efficiency. Tam/WB2TT |
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 21:00:56 -0400, Tam/WB2TT Wrote :
snip An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with its claim of high efficiency. Stand by for a "Revolutionary Antenna Cooling System". Then again, perhaps we're still thinking too far inside the box. What if this antenna is meant to radiate HEAT ? Hmmm doesn't do that all that well either - I know cover the thing in fins like a '60s car...:-) -- Humbug |
"Tom Ring" wrote in message ... Oh come on, he said it's revolutionary! You are being way too judgemental. The melting probably had nothing to do with losses. I mean, it could have burst into flames due to corona igniting the revolutionary materials it was made of, and that's what melted it. Yeah, that's the ticket. You mean like a helical carbon filament? Tam tom K0TAR Tam/WB2TT wrote: An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with its claim of high efficiency. Tam/WB2TT |
On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 20:54:05 -0400, william ewald
wrote: Profits? What profits? Hi Bill, You can name that tune: From the litigation extortion royalties acquired by rights of patents pending. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
This post below makes me think of the remarkable miniature "plastic apple" antenna. The requirement that the apple must be located far away from the radio and conected to it with a copper wire, is important. "Chuck...K1KW" wrote in message news:0wNvc.39192$3x.31853@attbi_s54... Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Article text below --------------------------------------------- Department of Communications/News Bureau 22 Davis Hall, 10 Lippitt Road, Kingston, RI 02881 Phone: 401-874-2116 Fax: 401-874-7872 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ---- URI physics employee invents new antenna technology Media Contact: Jan Wenzel, 401-874-2116 KINGSTON, R.I. -- June 2, 2004 -- Rob Vincent, an employee in the University of Rhode Island's Physics Department, proves the adage that necessity is the mother of invention. An amateur radio operator since he was 14, Vincent has always lived in houses situated on small lots. Because he couldn't erect a large antenna on a confined property, he has been continually challenged over the years to find a way to get better reception. "I was always tinkering in the basement. Thank goodness, my parents were tolerant. I can still remember my poor father driving up our driveway after a hard day's work to see wires wrapped around the house," Vincent recalls. "The Holy Grail of antenna technology is to create a small antenna with high efficiency and wide bandwidth," explains Vincent. "According to current theory, you have to give up one of the three-size, efficiency, or bandwidth-to achieve any one of the other two." After decades of experimentation, combined with a 30-year engineering career and Yankee ingenuity, Vincent has invented a revolutionary antenna technology. The distributed loaded monopole antennas are smaller, produce high efficiency, and retain good to excellent bandwidth. And they have multiple applications. With this technology it will be possible to double, at minimum, the range of walkie-talkies used by police, fire, and other municipal personnel. Naval ships, baby monitors, and portable antennas for military use are other applications. An antenna could be mounted on a chip in a cell phone and be applied to wireless local area networks. Another application deals with radio frequency identification, which is expected someday to replace the barcode system. "It could even make the Dick Tracy wrist radio with all the features, such as Internet access, a possibility," Vincent says. The inventor pursued his quest to build a better antenna in earnest eight years ago when he and his significant other moved into a house situated on a 50-foot by 100-foot lot in Warwick. There was nothing on the commercial market that could fit the lot that would provide the performance Vincent needed to be heard in distant lands and that would be acceptable to his neighbors. All the small antennas being sold were inefficient and lacked bandwidth, which resulted in low performance and high frustration. Vincent looked at the techniques that were currently used to reduce antenna size and realized something was missing in the way everyone was approaching the problem. He began to model various combinations into a computer program called MathCad. His first attempt produced a 21 MHz band antenna that was 18 inches high. Normally, antennas for this band are 12 to 24 feet high. Vincent installed the antenna in his back yard. The legal limit that amateurs can operate is 1,000 watts with the norm being 100 watts. The amateur radio operator experimented with 5 to 10 watts. He reached a station in Chile and made contacts in various European countries. Meanwhile he kept adding power until it reached 100 watts. That's when things suddenly went bad. Walking outside in the backyard, he understood why. The antenna had melted. After examining the molten matter, Vincent wasn't discouraged. This was only a small model and not designed to handle much power. The part of the antenna that failed proved to be the key to the design. After analyzing the failure, Vincent realized that he was able to transform a lot of current along the antenna with even relatively low power. "Antennas radiate by setting up large amounts of current flow through various parts of their structure," he says. "The larger the current the more radiation and the better the output of the antenna." Vincent went back to the drawing board and continued to improve the technology. Relying on his nearly 30 years at Raytheon Co. and at KVH Industries in Middletown R.I which provided him with a diversified background in electronics and electronic systems, Vincent overcame a myriad of problems and succeeded. He established three test sites for various prototypes. Antennas were placed in Westport, Mass. in a salt marsh, the best ground for transmission and reception. Another set of antennas were placed on rocky ground in Cumberland, R.I., the worst kind of site, and at a Warwick site which is in between the two. The antennas, which resemble flagpoles, worked well at all locations. Tests confirmed that Vincent has created antennas at one third to one ninth of their full size counterparts. Normally smaller antennas are only 8 to 15 percent efficient. Vincent's antennas achieved 80 to 100 percent efficiency as compared to the larger antennas. A patent is pending on Vincent's technology. The inventor has made the University of Rhode Island and its Physics Department partners that will benefit from any revenue his invention earns. "The University and its Physics Department has been very supportive and given me time and space to work on this project," says Vincent who was recently presented the 2004 Outstanding Intellectual Property Award by URI's Research Office. "I couldn' t have done this without the University's support. It's only fair that it share in the profits." |
"Dave" wrote in message ...
another loaded vertical. more details are required to see if its another EH, CFA, or some other variation of a standard loading arrangement. "Chuck...K1KW" wrote in message news:0wNvc.39192$3x.31853@attbi_s54... Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Do you think the technology might be similar to the 160 meter indoor antenna called the TeslaVert? Links: http://www.tfcbooks.com/special/lf/teslavert.htm Werner has the device located indoors at his home and is enjoying many QSOs on 160. http://www.antennex.com/Stones/st0503/st0503.htm Of particular interest was one variation of the design, for 160M, that used a flat coil and a spherical radiator at the top. As Werner studied the design, he started to think about the role of spherical shapes in general Physics and noted that virtually all real shapes, and shape models found in the universe are spheres or derivatives! So, Werner concluded why not use spheres for experiments with capacitive radiators? And why not see what could be learned about the superposition of fields, by using these shapes? Here's a cite to a fractal sphere antenna: Facchine, M.J.; Werner, D.H.; "Electromagnetic scattering from fractal spheres", Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium, 2002. IEEE , Volume: 3 , 16-21 June 2002 , pp. 106 -109. Image of fractal sphe http://www.fractal-dome.de/3dg4.shtml |
Yea...That's the ticket. Well, I figure he looked at the melted part and
said: "Gee, if I can keep this from melting..oh no... _WHY_ is it melting? ....perhaps high current. Yea, that's the ticket. There's high current in this part. I'll make it less lossy and it'll heat less and then the antenna'll be more efficient..... New technology, yea (;-). You can work Chile with a light bulb. As I say; "You need iron in the sky." PUBLISH and let the experts poke at it. My lot is 50' x 150' [155m x 460m outside the US] and I _very_ easily fit a 40M inverted Vee @35'. Work the world - several bands. There's a never ending quest for a number of physically unrealizable things including, but not limited to: a small, directive, high efficency antenna -- free power -- the "best" route to work -- the ideal mate...Yadda, Yadda I'll believe when... -- Steve N, K,9;d, c. i My email has no u's. "Tom Ring" wrote in message ... Oh come on, he said it's revolutionary! You are being way too judgemental. The melting probably had nothing to do with losses. I mean, it could have burst into flames due to corona igniting the revolutionary materials it was made of, and that's what melted it. Yeah, that's the ticket. tom K0TAR Tam/WB2TT wrote: An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with its claim of high efficiency. Tam/WB2TT |
"Chuck...K1KW" wrote in message news:0wNvc.39192$3x.31853@attbi_s54...
Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Article text below --------------------------------------------- Department of Communications/News Bureau 22 Davis Hall, 10 Lippitt Road, Kingston, RI 02881 Phone: 401-874-2116 Fax: 401-874-7872 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- URI physics employee invents new antenna technology Media Contact: Jan Wenzel, 401-874-2116 KINGSTON, R.I. -- June 2, 2004 -- Rob Vincent, an employee in the University of Rhode Island's Physics Department, proves the adage that necessity is the mother of invention. snip "According to current theory, you have to give up one of the three-size, efficiency, or bandwidth-to achieve any one of the other two." snip Is the above statement correct ? Regards Art5 |
|
Do you think the technology might be similar to the 160 meter indoor antenna called the TeslaVert? What a disservice to the great name of Tesla. Using loading coild to shorten the antenna and slap Tesla name on it to make "waves" in Antennex (BS) "magazine"? Yea spherical top is universe "invention". I got the copper toilet bowl float on the top of my vertical to prevent corona and add some top loading and broadbanding. Brace yourself for more "inventions" to come as we get flooded with more of un-knowledgeable hams. Hey, maybe there is a room to sell wunderantennas to idiots? I have 50 ohm DC to light 100% efficient, fits in a pocket miniature antenna for $100. (Secret? it is made by Ohmite) There is another one produced by GE or Phillips in China and it even provides light when power applied to it. You can use it as a lightbulb too. I will share my profits with US gubermint. Yuri, www.k3bu.us www.computeradio.us home of Dream Radio One |
"Chuck...K1KW" wrote in message news:0wNvc.39192$3x.31853@attbi_s54...
Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? Ask him, he dunnit. http://www.qrz.com/detail/K1DFT w3rv http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Article text below |
That says that narrow bandwidth contributes to higher efficiency
which is how I always understood it.(Though many do not accept that) But as you say it is a shorthand type statement. My antenna on 160 is very narrow banded at any particular setting or frequency ( two loops and a short dipole coupled in tight cluster form),when modelled ,shows part of the current curve breaking out into a sino soidal oscillation (no phase change) for portions of the antenna. Such modelling, ofcourse, requires a large amount of points per unit length for high accuracy and the occillation would probably not show up visually if calculation points were reduced. It does not seem to affect things in practice on the air but I have often wondered what the consequences would be if the bandwidth was narrowed even more and the current oscillation possibly propagate over all the of the antenna ! With the current taking on an occillation it would suggest changes in radiation Art Richard Clark wrote in message . .. On 4 Jun 2004 10:44:01 -0700, (Art Unwin KB9MZ) wrote: "According to current theory, you have to give up one of the three-size, efficiency, or bandwidth-to achieve any one of the other two." snip Is the above statement correct ? Hi Art, In a crude and shorthand way, yes. This is why your small 160M vertical dipole is up to 15 to 17dB below performance in comparison to a full size one. All common legacy for CFAs, EHs, fractals, and the rest of this ilk that come down the pike. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
|
snip
wrote: "According to current theory, you have to give up one of the three-size, efficiency, or bandwidth-to achieve any one of the other two." snip Is the above statement correct ? Hi Art, In a crude and shorthand way, yes. This is why your small 160M vertical dipole is up to 15 to 17dB below performance in comparison to a full size one. All common legacy for CFAs, EHs, fractals, and the rest of this ilk that come down the pike. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hmm I don't know where you are coming from but I ouldn't put my antenna in the CFA group that you state above. I know in the past that your antenna is better than mine which is O.K. but the fact is that many amateurs like to experiment and also pursue the "holy grail" Each attempt provide knowledge which is why antennas are pursued so much .I wager that the patent pending aproach discussed will provide welcome reading for everybody on this newsgroup. As for my particular antenna pursuit I am still not ready to throw it into the dustbin as every change provides new insights on antennas ( the sinosoidal current wave for one) I use my present antenna in the rotatable form on the top of the tower for convenience but I modelled it after reading your comments and they are as follows Top band....vertical orientation Impedance 349 +j41 ohms ( 186-j13 ohms when horizontally oriented on the tower) Load losses 2.88 db Efficiency 51.5% Radiation peak 23 degrees elevation -1.53dbi The above has bandwidth of around 5 Khz which is O.K. for audio, and frequency of use is selectable across the band. Since the feed point is at the center I don't have to tear up the lawn for those rotten radial wires. Efficiency jumps to over 90% on 80 meters and other bands with the typical figure eight form pattern, but my primary pursuit is on top band. Yes, the antenna can be beaten when following conventional design but the hunt using unconventional designs is part of the excitement, where slight change of inductance value moves you along the band /bands with out restriction with respect to power , the requirement of high voltage capacitors or large areas of grounding systems. My antenna may be regarded as 'useless' by many but, unlike the CFA and other antennas you placed me with, my antenna is in use and the impedances provided seem to match those given by modelling using a PRO antenna program and using maximum segments because of the UNCONVENTIONAL close coupled cluster design. Unconventional design provides insights to antennas like the oscillations that I refered to earlier, which is not to be seen on conventional designs and for which I seek further understanding and explanation. The new unconventional design from R.I. which is 'patent pending' no less may well provide further insights that we are unaware of. Unfortunately his efforts WILL be ridiculed by those who know that 'every thing about antennas is known' and by sharing he has shown his personal foolishnes to his peers. When will the amateur learn that it is a waste of time to experiment where the failures are heralded and the minutia of new facts are ignored ??? Please forgive me for writing this extra post which has strayed from my original post. Regards to all Art |
snip
wrote: "According to current theory, you have to give up one of the three-size, efficiency, or bandwidth-to achieve any one of the other two." snip Is the above statement correct ? Hi Art, In a crude and shorthand way, yes. This is why your small 160M vertical dipole is up to 15 to 17dB below performance in comparison to a full size one. All common legacy for CFAs, EHs, fractals, and the rest of this ilk that come down the pike. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hmm I don't know where you are coming from but I ouldn't put my antenna in the CFA group that you state above. I know in the past that your antenna is better than mine which is O.K. but the fact is that many amateurs like to experiment and also pursue the "holy grail" Each attempt provide knowledge which is why antennas are pursued so much .I wager that the patent pending aproach discussed will provide welcome reading for everybody on this newsgroup. As for my particular antenna pursuit I am still not ready to throw it into the dustbin as every change provides new insights on antennas ( the sinosoidal current wave for one) I use my present antenna in the rotatable form on the top of the tower for convenience but I modelled it after reading your comments and they are as follows Top band....vertical orientation Impedance 349 +j41 ohms ( 186-j13 ohms when horizontally oriented on the tower) Load losses 2.88 db Efficiency 51.5% Radiation peak 23 degrees elevation -1.53dbi The above has bandwidth of around 5 Khz which is O.K. for audio, and frequency of use is selectable across the band. Since the feed point is at the center I don't have to tear up the lawn for those rotten radial wires. Efficiency jumps to over 90% on 80 meters and other bands with the typical figure eight form pattern, but my primary pursuit is on top band. Yes, the antenna can be beaten when following conventional design but the hunt using unconventional designs is part of the excitement, where slight change of inductance value moves you along the band /bands with out restriction with respect to power , the requirement of high voltage capacitors or large areas of grounding systems. My antenna may be regarded as 'useless' by many but, unlike the CFA and other antennas you placed me with, my antenna is in use and the impedances provided seem to match those given by modelling using a PRO antenna program and using maximum segments because of the UNCONVENTIONAL close coupled cluster design. Unconventional design provides insights to antennas like the oscillations that I refered to earlier, which is not to be seen on conventional designs and for which I seek further understanding and explanation. The new unconventional design from R.I. which is 'patent pending' no less may well provide further insights that we are unaware of. Unfortunately his efforts WILL be ridiculed by those who know that 'every thing about antennas is known' and by sharing he has shown his personal foolishnes to his peers. When will the amateur learn that it is a waste of time to experiment where the failures are heralded and the minutia of new facts are ignored ??? Please forgive me for writing this extra post which has strayed from my original post. Regards to all Art |
|
Chuck...K1KW wrote:
Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Melted the antenna with 100 W. Could it be just a tad lossy? Efficiency claims are clearly bogus. vy 73 Andy, M1EBV |
"Chuck...K1KW" wrote in message news:0wNvc.39192$3x.31853@attbi_s54...
Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Another article http://www.eet.com/at/news/showArtic...cleID=21401977 PORTLAND, Ore. — A four-year skunk works effort at the University of Rhode Island in Kingston has cut the size of an antenna by as much as one-third for any frequency from the KHz to the GHz range.... |
k4wge wrote:
PORTLAND, Ore. — A four-year skunk works effort So that's what they're smoking. I guess that explains the claims. ;-) vy 73 Andy, M1EBV |
"Chuck...K1KW" wrote in message news:0wNvc.39192$3x.31853@attbi_s54...
Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below? http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659 Chuck...K1KW Smaller antenna design said to boost efficiency By R. Colin Johnson EE Times June 07, 2004 (4:00 PM EDT) PORTLAND, Ore. — A four-year skunk works effort at the University of Rhode Island in Kingston has cut the size of an antenna by as much as one-third for any frequency from the KHz to the GHz range. Using conventional components the four-part antenna design cancels out normal inductive loading, thereby linearizing the energy radiation along its mast and enabling the smaller size. "The DLM [distributed load monopole] antenna is based on a lot of things that currently exist," said the researcher who invented the smaller antenna, Robert Vincent of the university's physics department, "but I've been able to put a combination of them together to create a revolutionary way of building antennas. It uses basically a helix plus a load coil." The patent-pending design could transform every antenna-from the GHz models for cell phones to the giant, KHz AM antennas that stud the high ground of metropolitan areas-Vincent said. For cellphones, for example, Vincent said he has a completely planar design that is less than a third the size of today's cellphone antennas. And those 300-foot tall antennas for the 900-KHz AM band that dominate skylines would have to be only 80 feet high, with no compromise in performance, using Vincent's design, he said. "With my technique, I reduce the inductive loading that is normally required to resonate the antenna by as much as 75 percent . . . by utilizing the distributed capacitance around the antenna," he explained. "I looked at all the different approaches used to make antennas smaller, and there seemed to be good and bad aspects" to each, Vincent said. "A helix antenna is normally known to be a core radiator, because the current profile drops off rapidly; they are just an inductor, and inductance does not like to see changes in current, so it's going to buck that. "What I found was that for any smaller antenna, if you place a load coil in the middle you can normalize and make the current through the helix unity; that is, you can maximize it and linearize it," he added. Vincent has verified designs from 1.8 MHz to 200 MHz by measuring and characterizing the behavior of his DLM antenna compared with a normal quarter-wave antenna of the same frequency. He found that many of the disadvantages of traditional antennas were not problems for the much lighter inductive loading in a DLM. To check his theory, Vincent analyzed and compared the current profiles, output power and a score of other standard tests for measuring antenna performance. All measurements were in reference to comparative measurements made on a quarter-wave vertical antenna for the same frequency, on the same ground system and same power input. "I was able to increase the current profile of the antenna over a quarter-wave by as much as two to 2.5 times," said Vincent. "The technology is completely scalable: Take the component values and divide them by two, and you get twice the frequency; take all the component values and multiply them by two, and you are at half the frequency," said Vincent. Vincent said he is moving up into the GHz bands for use with cellphones and radio-frequency ID equipment. A problem in the past has been that as components are downsized, they become too small to utilize standard antenna materials. At 1 GHz, for example, the helix is only eight-thousandths of an inch in diameter and requires more than 100 turns of wire. "So I came up with a new way of developing a helix for high frequencies that is a fully planar design; it's a two-dimensional helix," said Vincent. With the new helix design, Vincent has built a prototype 7-GHz antenna that he claims is indistinguishable from a quarter-wave antenna in all but its size. "Because the new design is completely planar, we could crank these out using thin-film technologies," Vincent said. |
k4wge wrote:
It uses basically a helix plus a load coil." I see those all the time on 18-wheelers. Aren't they called firesticks or something like that? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com