Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

On 7/6/2012 11:44 PM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote:
wrote in message
. net...
On 7/6/2012 3:46 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci

Do you agree that such "dipole" is the monopole?
S*


Absolutely not.

tom
K0TAR


Is this guy the ghost of Allen Funt? He has set up such an improbable
situation with his nonsense that we are unable to grasp it, so we suspend
disbelief.

"Sal"



Allen Funt was intelligent. And funny. SB is neither.

All he can do is google, copy URLs or parts of articles, then paste.
Zero brain activity involved.

tom
K0TAR

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

On 7/8/2012 4:31 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan wrote:

You should know that the true dipole is directional.
Are your "dipoles" directional?

Everything build-able is directional, to a greater or lesser degree,
when the pattern is viewed in 3 dimensions.

tom
K0TAR

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

John H. Guillory wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 17:19:51 -0000, wrote:

[- You should know that the true dipole is directional.
[- Are your "dipoles" directional?
[-
[-Dipoles are not directional, they are bidirectional in the plane of
the
[-antenna and ALL dipoles are bidirectional in the plane of the
antenna.
Just a FYI to jump in over here.... According to the General
Class Amateur License Exam, a Dipole has figure 8 resonance off both
ends of the dipole at 90 degrees from the poles. If, however, the
dipole is lowered below 1/2 the wave length, the dipole becomes
omni-directional. Just thought I'd throw that in.... The exact
wording may be a little different, but.... Just wanted to toss that
into the flames and ignite it a little more...

KF5QEO

Well, the height over ground will effect the pattern, but it does not
become omnidirectional.

As you get lower in height, the null of a free space or high antenna
starts going away.

At wavelengths over ground:

2, ends are 30 db down from broadside

1, about 22 db down

..5, about 10 db down

..25, about 3 db down

So it approaches omnidirectonal as you get lower but is only omnidirectional
at zero height.

EZNEC is your friend.

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

tom wrote:
On 7/8/2012 4:31 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan wrote:

You should know that the true dipole is directional.
Are your "dipoles" directional?

Everything build-able is directional, to a greater or lesser degree,
when the pattern is viewed in 3 dimensions.

tom
K0TAR


You want this moron to think in three dimensions when he can't tell the
difference between 1 and 2 (monopole/dipole)?

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


"The Hertzian dipole Consider two small spherical conductors connected by
a
wire. Suppose that electric charge flows periodically back and forth
between
the spheres."

In " NASA" antennas (eg. phase radars) the each "sphere" is fed from
special
feeder.

Phased radars don't use spheres for antennas.

Hertz was using the spheres or plates. They both were the ends of the open
circuit. The end can be without any "hat".


If are the two sphere we have a dipole (Hertzian dipole).


In Marconi antenna is only one "sphere". It is the monopole.

Do you have exactly the same voltages in the both ends of your "dipole"?
S*

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


The braid and the arm are together the counterpoise.

No, they are not, you babbling idiot.

Have you the same voltages on the braid and on the coax "live" wire?

Not without a ballancing device of some sort.

Are the same voltages on the counterpoise and on the arm?

If not, than you heve the monopole.

What an utter idiot; a monopole has one physical element while a dipole
has two physical elements.

Monopole have always the two elements: the antenna and the counterpoise.

That is the meaning of the prefixes "mono", which means one, and "di",
which means two.

So monopole has the one pole. The end of the counterpoise is not the pole.
In your "dipole" the counterpoise is in the form of one elevated radial.
S*

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


Monopole antenna: "One side of the antenna feedline is attached to the
lower
end of the monopole, and the other side is attached to the ground plane,
which is often the Earth."

Yes, and there in ONE element.

Dipole antenna: "A dipole antenna is a straight electrical conductor
measuring 1/2 wavelength from end to end and connected at the center to a
radio-frequency (RF) feed line. This antenna, also called a doublet, is
one
of the simplest types of antenna, and constitutes the main RF radiating
and
receiving element in various sophisticated types of antennas. The dipole
is
inherently a balanced antenna, because it is bilaterally symmetrical.
Ideally, a dipole antenna is fed with a balanced, parallel-wire RF
transmission line"

Yes, and there are TWO elements.

The Hertz dipole was symmetrical.

A dipole is symmetrical by definition, idiot.

The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the second
to a "ground" is the monopole.
Yours "dipoles" are not symmetrical (electrically0. They are symmetrical
mechanically.
S*

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

It is your misunderstanding that:

1. amateurs always connect coax directly to a dipole. they don't.
those that are in the know will use a balun.

2. the braid of the coax is "ground". this is not true. there will
be voltage at the braid of the coax at the antenna end when a balun
is not used.

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

In message , Rob
writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

It is your misunderstanding that:

1. amateurs always connect coax directly to a dipole. they don't.
those that are in the know will use a balun.

In the past, many amateurs did connect coax directly to a dipole. The
reason is that - on most occasions - it worked perfectly well, and they
'got away with it'. It was only when problems occurred (interference to
TV, radio, Hi-Fi etc) that much thought was given to the need for a
balun.

In modern times, there is a lot more opportunity for amateurs to
interfere with - and suffer interference from - all kinds of domestic
equipment, and the use of a balun (or twin feeder) has more-or-less
become an absolute necessity.

2. the braid of the coax is "ground". this is not true. there will
be voltage at the braid of the coax at the antenna end when a balun
is not used.

Szczepan is obviously making the fundamental mistake of thinking that,
because the coax screen is grounded at the transmitter end (or at least
connected to the chassis of the transmitter), it is therefore at zero RF
potential - and that it is still at RF potential at the far (antenna)
end, where it is connected directly to the 'other' leg of the dipole.
This is wrong.

He is then assuming that if the coax screen is at zero RF potential
where it is connected to the other leg of the dipole, then the other leg
of the dipole is also at zero RF potential (and doesn't radiate). This
is wrong.

He is therefore concluding that as both the coax screen and the other
leg of the dipole are at zero RF potential, the only part of the antenna
system that is 'RF live' is the leg of the dipole which is connected to
the inner conductor of the coax - which is what happens with a monopole.
As a result, he is then claiming that a dipole is really only a
monopole. This is wrong.

However, I'm still convinced that Szczepan knows far more about radio
than he appears to, and is cunningly trying to get us to explain
phenomena which maybe we really don't know as much about as we like to
think we do!
--
Ian

Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


Monopole antenna: "One side of the antenna feedline is attached to the
lower
end of the monopole, and the other side is attached to the ground plane,
which is often the Earth."

Yes, and there in ONE element.

Dipole antenna: "A dipole antenna is a straight electrical conductor
measuring 1/2 wavelength from end to end and connected at the center to a
radio-frequency (RF) feed line. This antenna, also called a doublet, is
one
of the simplest types of antenna, and constitutes the main RF radiating
and
receiving element in various sophisticated types of antennas. The dipole
is
inherently a balanced antenna, because it is bilaterally symmetrical.
Ideally, a dipole antenna is fed with a balanced, parallel-wire RF
transmission line"

Yes, and there are TWO elements.

The Hertz dipole was symmetrical.

A dipole is symmetrical by definition, idiot.

The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

The transmission line used to connect to the antenna has absolutely
nothing to do with what kind of antenna a particular antenna is.

Transmission lines and antennas are two separate things.

You are a babbling, ineducable idiot.

Yours "dipoles" are not symmetrical (electrically0. They are symmetrical
mechanically.

ALL of my dipoles ARE electrically symmetrical as they are fed either with
balanced transmission line or there is a balancing device between the
transmission line and the antenna.

How many antennas have you built in your lifetime?