Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Hi, I looked through Albert Shadowitz's "The Electromagnetic Field", and found on page 554 support for my original statement that antennas "match" to the impedance of free space (377 Ohms). I didn't buy the book, but professor Shadowitz did write on this page about how creating antennas to most efficiently transfer power to free space is a similar problem to matching a circuits source to its load. He goes on to make a short comparison between source/load impedances to an antenna matching to the impedance of free-space. Food for thought and no doubt, debate. Slick Yep, I tried to question that few moons back, but was "convinced" here that it is not important. Generally antenna exhibits all kinds of impedances along its length. I was reasoning that antenna having its lowest impedance higher or closer to 377 ohm should have better efficiency in coupling to the space (air). So loops and folded dipoles should be better in that respect. K8CFU et al, when doing experiments with verticals and radials, found that folded monopole measured higher signal levels (over simple monopole) than expected. Any progress since then? Yuri, K3BU |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
50 Ohms "Real Resistive" impedance a Misnomer? | Antenna |