Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

napisal w wiadomosci
...
I'm probably known as the anti-ground.. lol..
IE: I don't believe in RF grounds in the shack unless
the antenna is fed directly from the shack. Which
is fairly rare for me, but I have done it on 160m a
few times..
My way of thinking is that an RF ground should always
be a part of the antenna itself, preferably away from
the shack. IE: a dipole is a complete antenna, and
requires no ground for proper operation at the antenna,
or at the shack. You don't need an RF ground at all.

Your dipole is not the dipole but the monopole with the one radial.

In the case of a vertical, the RF ground should be
under the antenna if a monopole. IE: ground radials under
a ground mount, or elevated radials for a ground plane.

Your dipole is a horizontal monopole with the one radial.
The vertical monopole can have only one radial.

More radials is necessary for a strong stations.
Do you understand?

The only difference between your monopole and your vertical antenna is the
direction.
Do you agree?
S*

With either one of these, no RF ground is required for
the shack. Ditto for a half wave vertical, which is a
complete antenna. The only worry with it, is feed line
radiation, which is a bit different issue. It just needs
to be decoupled for the best operation.
But that is something to be considered with any antenna,
including the dipoles.

The only ground I use at the shack is the safety ground
for line voltage gear.. All lightning grounding must be
at the antenna/mast, and at the entrance to the shack.
"ground window".

I quit using a shack RF ground in the mid 90's or so..
Ain't missed it all at so far... I actually had more
issues when running high power "KW+" with a shack RF
ground vs not using one.

The use of the ground wire tuning may well help it work
better on certain bands to prevent a hot shack.
But I consider it a band aid to help hide problems that
actually should be addressed at the antenna. Or in a perfect
world at least..

BTW, I do not agree with the notion that an antenna needs to
be resonant. That is another wives tail, as pointed out by
Cecil. Even a dipole that is .05 WL long will radiate nearly
all power that is applied to it. And antennas are reciprocal
between radiating, and receiving.
The trick is getting the power to and from the small antenna
without it turning into heat. :/ There can be problems with
excess loss, but it's not the element's fault for being non
resonant.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On Friday, April 26, 2013 2:59:05 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
IE: a dipole is a complete antenna, and

requires no ground for proper operation at the antenna,

or at the shack. You don't need an RF ground at all.



Your dipole is not the dipole but the monopole with the one radial.

A monopole with one opposite radial is a dipole. :/




In the case of a vertical, the RF ground should be

under the antenna if a monopole. IE: ground radials under

a ground mount, or elevated radials for a ground plane.



Your dipole is a horizontal monopole with the one radial.

No, it's a dipole.

The vertical monopole can have only one radial.

I suspect that statement is going to be quite a shock to
the hundreds of stations that lay out 120 or more of them.





More radials is necessary for a strong stations.

To equal a certain level of ground loss, over a given amount of
ground conductivity, the number of radials required under a monopole
will depend on it's height above ground in wavelength.


Do you understand?

Probably, when I'm under the clinical supervision of a
doktor. :/




The only difference between your monopole and your vertical antenna is the

direction.

Do you agree?

No, because you are mislabeling a dog, and trying to compare
it to a cat.

In free space, the only difference between a vertical dipole,
and a horizontal dipole is direction.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Your dipole is not the dipole but the monopole with the one radial.

A dipole is a dipole.

You are an idiot.

Your dipole is a horizontal monopole with the one radial.

A dipole is a dipole.

You are an idiot.

The vertical monopole can have only one radial.

More radials is necessary for a strong stations.

More radials are necessary for a symetrical pattern, elimated feedline
currents, reduce ground losses, and a predictable impedence.

Do you understand?

You understand nothing.

The only difference between your monopole and your vertical antenna is the
direction.

As far as the pattern over real ground is concerned, they are essentially
identical.

But the feedpoint impedences and feed method are different.

Do you agree?

You understand nothing.

You are an idiot.


--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Friday, April 26, 2013 2:59:05 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Your dipole is not the dipole but the monopole with the one radial.

A monopole with one opposite radial is a dipole. :/

"A dipole is a symmetrical antenna, as it is composed of two symmetrical
ungrounded elements. Therefore it works best when fed by a balanced
transmission line, such as a ladder line." From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna



The only difference between your monopole and your vertical antenna is
the

direction.

Do you agree?

No, because you are mislabeling a dog, and trying to compare
it to a cat.

In free space, the only difference between a vertical dipole,
and a horizontal dipole is direction.

Dipole has "two symmetrical ungrounded elements".
Your dipole has the one grounded:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Di..._in_meters.png

A Dog and a cat are animals. But quite different.
The name "dipole" is like animals.
The dipole with grounded one leg is quite different from the "symmetrical
dipole".
Do you agree?
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On Friday, April 26, 2013 10:20:00 AM UTC-5, wrote:
In free space, the only difference between a vertical dipole,
and a horizontal dipole is direction.

So --- which way is up? :)
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On Friday, April 26, 2013 10:52:18 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The dipole with grounded one leg is quite different from the "symmetrical
dipole".

According to the official IEEE definition of a "dipole", it is any antenna with approximately the same radiation pattern as a dipole.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On Friday, April 26, 2013 11:21:35 AM UTC-5, W5DXP wrote:
On Friday, April 26, 2013 10:20:00 AM UTC-5, wrote:

In free space, the only difference between a vertical dipole,

and a horizontal dipole is direction.



So --- which way is up? :)


Good question.. :)

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Dipole has "two symmetrical ungrounded elements".

Yep.

Your dipole has the one grounded:

Nope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Di..._in_meters.png

No ground here idiot.

A Dog and a cat are animals. But quite different.
The name "dipole" is like animals.
The dipole with grounded one leg is quite different from the "symmetrical
dipole".
Do you agree?
S*

I agree everything you just said is ignorant gibberish.


--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Beware of any inputs from this bialek guy! He appears to be either a troll
or
a blithering idiot. If you let him drag you into a discussion of his point
of view
he will lead you on endlessly and ignorantly!.

Irv VE6BP


"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

napisal w wiadomosci
...
I'm probably known as the anti-ground.. lol..
IE: I don't believe in RF grounds in the shack unless
the antenna is fed directly from the shack. Which
is fairly rare for me, but I have done it on 160m a
few times..
My way of thinking is that an RF ground should always
be a part of the antenna itself, preferably away from
the shack. IE: a dipole is a complete antenna, and
requires no ground for proper operation at the antenna,
or at the shack. You don't need an RF ground at all.

Your dipole is not the dipole but the monopole with the one radial.

In the case of a vertical, the RF ground should be
under the antenna if a monopole. IE: ground radials under
a ground mount, or elevated radials for a ground plane.

Your dipole is a horizontal monopole with the one radial.
The vertical monopole can have only one radial.

More radials is necessary for a strong stations.
Do you understand?

The only difference between your monopole and your vertical antenna is the
direction.
Do you agree?
S*

With either one of these, no RF ground is required for
the shack. Ditto for a half wave vertical, which is a
complete antenna. The only worry with it, is feed line
radiation, which is a bit different issue. It just needs
to be decoupled for the best operation.
But that is something to be considered with any antenna,
including the dipoles.

The only ground I use at the shack is the safety ground
for line voltage gear.. All lightning grounding must be
at the antenna/mast, and at the entrance to the shack.
"ground window".

I quit using a shack RF ground in the mid 90's or so..
Ain't missed it all at so far... I actually had more
issues when running high power "KW+" with a shack RF
ground vs not using one.

The use of the ground wire tuning may well help it work
better on certain bands to prevent a hot shack.
But I consider it a band aid to help hide problems that
actually should be addressed at the antenna. Or in a perfect
world at least..

BTW, I do not agree with the notion that an antenna needs to
be resonant. That is another wives tail, as pointed out by
Cecil. Even a dipole that is .05 WL long will radiate nearly
all power that is applied to it. And antennas are reciprocal
between radiating, and receiving.
The trick is getting the power to and from the small antenna
without it turning into heat. :/ There can be problems with
excess loss, but it's not the element's fault for being non
resonant.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Irv Finkleman" wrote in message ...

Beware of any inputs from this bialek guy! He appears to be either a troll
or
a blithering idiot. If you let him drag you into a discussion of his point
of view
he will lead you on endlessly and ignorantly!.

Irv VE6BP

He always makes me wonder if Chip is back :)

Wayne W5GIE
(in exile in W6 land)

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On 4/26/2013 2:59 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci

Your dipole is not the dipole but the monopole with the one radial.

snip

He's baaaaack!

And he's still really wrong.

This should be fun!

tom
K0TAR

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
Beware of any inputs from this bialek guy! He appears to be either a troll

or

a blithering idiot. If you let him drag you into a discussion of his point

of view

he will lead you on endlessly and ignorantly!.



Irv VE6BP

It's good wholesome entertainment for the whole family. :)

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

wrote in message
...

On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
Beware of any inputs from this bialek guy! He appears to be either a
troll

or

a blithering idiot. If you let him drag you into a discussion of his point

of view

he will lead you on endlessly and ignorantly!.



Irv VE6BP

# It's good wholesome entertainment for the whole family. :)

Well, you must admit we could use something to jumpstart discussions on this
newsgroup.

Maybe SB can explain the difference between a monopole with a single
ungrounded radial, and a dipole.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Friday, April 26, 2013 10:52:18 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The dipole with grounded one leg is quite different from the "symmetrical
dipole".

According to the official IEEE definition of a "dipole", it is any antenna
with approximately the same radiation pattern as a dipole.

Of course: "Dipoles have a radiation pattern, shaped like a toroid
(doughnut) symmetrical about the axis of the dipole. The radiation is
maximum at right angles to the dipole, dropping off to zero on the antenna's
axis. The theoretical maximum gain of a Hertzian dipole is 10 log 1.5 or
1.76 dBi. The maximum theoretical gain of a ?/2-dipole is 10 log 1.64 or
2.15 dBi."

The antenna like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Di..._in_meters.png

". However, coax is not symmetrical and thus not a balanced feeder. It is
unbalanced because the outer shield is connected to earth potential at the
other end. When a balanced antenna such as a dipole is fed with an
unbalanced feeder, common mode currents can cause the coax line to radiate
in addition to the antenna itself,[5] and the radiation pattern may be
asymmetrically distorted"

Such antenna is MECHANICALY symmetrical.
But electrically is rather like the Marconi monopole:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A6-3EN.jpg

Remember: The grounded leg is the radial.
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Remember: The grounded leg is the radial.

You think that because one end of the coax has its shield grounded,
the other end has its shield at ground potential.
That is not true. At radio frequencies, there can be a potential
at one end of a conductor even when the other end is grounded.

It will result in a radiating outer conductor of the coax, but not
in a grounded leg of the dipole.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Yes -- I must admit now that I look forward to his
inputs which are amusing if nothing else.
Entertainment -- YES! Information -- NOT!.

Irv VE6BP

wrote in message
...
On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
Beware of any inputs from this bialek guy! He appears to be either a
troll

or

a blithering idiot. If you let him drag you into a discussion of his
point

of view

he will lead you on endlessly and ignorantly!.



Irv VE6BP

It's good wholesome entertainment for the whole family. :)

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Rob" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Remember: The grounded leg is the radial.

You think that because one end of the coax has its shield grounded,
the other end has its shield at ground potential.
That is not true. At radio frequencies, there can be a potential
at one end of a conductor even when the other end is grounded.

It will result in a radiating outer conductor of the coax, but not
in a grounded leg of the dipole.

"The radiation is
maximum at right angles to the dipole, dropping off to zero on the antenna's
axis."

Who of yours want to have the directional antenna?
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Uzytkownik "Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


wrote in message
...

On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
Beware of any inputs from this bialek guy! He appears to be either a
troll

or

a blithering idiot. If you let him drag you into a discussion of his
point

of view

he will lead you on endlessly and ignorantly!.



Irv VE6BP

# It's good wholesome entertainment for the whole family. :)

Well, you must admit we could use something to jumpstart discussions on
this newsgroup.

Maybe SB can explain the difference between a monopole with a single
ungrounded radial, and a dipole.

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax), is
the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

Monopole is not directional.
Dipole is directional.
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Irv Finkleman" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Yes -- I must admit now that I look forward to his
inputs which are amusing if nothing else.
Entertainment -- YES! Information -- NOT!.

Your opinion is about Wiki: My inputs are From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax), is
the ground.

Wrong.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Friday, April 26, 2013 10:52:18 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The dipole with grounded one leg is quite different from the "symmetrical
dipole".

According to the official IEEE definition of a "dipole", it is any antenna
with approximately the same radiation pattern as a dipole.

Of course: "Dipoles have a radiation pattern, shaped like a toroid
(doughnut) symmetrical about the axis of the dipole. The radiation is
maximum at right angles to the dipole, dropping off to zero on the antenna's
axis. The theoretical maximum gain of a Hertzian dipole is 10 log 1.5 or
1.76 dBi. The maximum theoretical gain of a ?/2-dipole is 10 log 1.64 or
2.15 dBi."

True.

The antenna like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Di..._in_meters.png

". However, coax is not symmetrical and thus not a balanced feeder. It is
unbalanced because the outer shield is connected to earth potential at the
other end. When a balanced antenna such as a dipole is fed with an
unbalanced feeder, common mode currents can cause the coax line to radiate
in addition to the antenna itself,[5] and the radiation pattern may be
asymmetrically distorted"

True to a point.

The outer shield may or may not be connected to earth potenial anywhere.

Such antenna is MECHANICALY symmetrical.
But electrically is rather like the Marconi monopole:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A6-3EN.jpg

Confused babble.

The antenna is the antenna and the feedline is the feedline.

Whether or not the feedline radiates is totally irrelevant to what the
antenna does.

This is something you are totally incapable of understanding.

Remember: The grounded leg is the radial.

Remeber: This is puerile, ignorant, nonsense.



--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Irv Finkleman" napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Yes -- I must admit now that I look forward to his
inputs which are amusing if nothing else.
Entertainment -- YES! Information -- NOT!.

Your opinion is about Wiki: My inputs are From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna
S*

Your quotes are from Wiki.

Your interpretation of the quotes is from a very damaged brain.



--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax), is
the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

All gibberish, as usual.

Monopole is not directional.

Wrong; a monopole can be directional, all you have to to is tilt it slightly.



--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .


Uzytkownik "Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


wrote in message
...

On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
snip

Maybe SB can explain the difference between a monopole with a single
ungrounded radial, and a dipole.

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax), is
the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

What if the single ungrounded quarter wave radial is in line with the
quarter wave radiator?
Is it still a monopole?

Monopole is not directional.

Does this assume the monopole is vertical?
What if it is horizontal? Is it still non-directional?

Dipole is directional.
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .


Uzytkownik "Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


wrote in message
...

On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
snip

Maybe SB can explain the difference between a monopole with a single
ungrounded radial, and a dipole.

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax), is
the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

What if the single ungrounded quarter wave radial is in line with the
quarter wave radiator?
Is it still a monopole?

Of course.

Monopole is not directional.

Does this assume the monopole is vertical?

In the space no the directions.
The monopole radiate from the end part of the wire. So the one mast is
enough.
But you can make the two masts.

What if it is horizontal? Is it still non-directional?

Of course.
To have the directional antenna you must have the antenna array:
"An antenna array is a group of radiators whose currents are of different
amplitudes and phases. They use electromagnetic wave interference phenomena
to enhance the radiative signal in the desired direction and diminish it in
the non-desired direction". From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna...lectromagnetic)

The electrically symmetrical dipole is the antenna array.
The whip antenna is always non-directional. But in mountains it work better
if it is horizontal.

Each antenna made of wire radiate from the end piece of the wire. So the
wertical radiate in the all direction but tangent to the Earht surface.
The horizontal radiate in direction of ionsphere. It is usefull in moutains.

The directional antenna has the lobes.
The monopole antenna shorter than 1/4 wave has no lobes.
But a long wire antenna have lobes. There are the many "poles" (nodes) and
the interference take place.
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

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

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax),
is
the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

All gibberish, as usual.

Monopole is not directional.

Wrong; a monopole can be directional, all you have to do is tilt it
slightly.

Read my answer for Wayne.
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

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

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax),
is
the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

All gibberish, as usual.

Monopole is not directional.

Wrong; a monopole can be directional, all you have to do is tilt it
slightly.

Read my answer for Wayne.

All of your "answers" are ignorant babble.



--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

In the space no the directions.
The monopole radiate from the end part of the wire. So the one mast is
enough.
But you can make the two masts.

Pure gibberish.

To have the directional antenna you must have the antenna array:
"An antenna array is a group of radiators whose currents are of different
amplitudes and phases. They use electromagnetic wave interference phenomena
to enhance the radiative signal in the desired direction and diminish it in
the non-desired direction". From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna...lectromagnetic)

Wiki may be correct, but your interpretation is nonsense.

The electrically symmetrical dipole is the antenna array.

A dipole is a dipole and is not concidered an array by anyone but you.

The whip antenna is always non-directional. But in mountains it work better
if it is horizontal.

Wrong and wrong.

Each antenna made of wire radiate from the end piece of the wire. So the
wertical radiate in the all direction but tangent to the Earht surface.
The horizontal radiate in direction of ionsphere. It is usefull in moutains.

Gibberish.

The directional antenna has the lobes.
The monopole antenna shorter than 1/4 wave has no lobes.

Wrong.

You are still a babbling idiot.


--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...


"Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .


Uzytkownik "Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


wrote in message
...

On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
snip

Maybe SB can explain the difference between a monopole with a single
ungrounded radial, and a dipole.

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax), is
the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

What if the single ungrounded quarter wave radial is in line with the
quarter wave radiator?
Is it still a monopole?

# Of course.

Wow...you gave a lot to digest.

Just to understand the discussion, let's address the monopole with one
radial.

Assuming the monopole is 1/4 wave long, and has a 1/4 wave long radial.
The radial is in line with the monopole. Everything is ungrounded.

How does that configuration of a monopole with one radial differ from a
dipole?

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...


On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
snip

Maybe SB can explain the difference between a monopole with a single
ungrounded radial, and a dipole.

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax),
is the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

What if the single ungrounded quarter wave radial is in line with the
quarter wave radiator?
Is it still a monopole?

# Of course.

Wow...you gave a lot to digest.

Just to understand the discussion, let's address the monopole with one
radial.

Assuming the monopole is 1/4 wave long, and has a 1/4 wave long radial.
The radial is in line with the monopole. Everything is ungrounded.

The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.

How does that configuration of a monopole with one radial differ from a
dipole?

The first dipole was the Hertz dipole. The both legs were fed with the same
frequency but not in phase. The both ends radiate with the same intensity.
The Marconi antenna has only one radiated leg. It is almost in the free
space (masts are high).

The horizontal dipole radiate in one horizontal direction only. The vertical
in all horizontal directions. But the mast must be very high.
The horizontal, vertical or tilted monopole radiate in all directions. Your
cell phone has the monopole.
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.

No Szczepan!
You keep saying that, but it is wrong.

When a coax shield is grounded at one end, and after a considerable
length of coax it is connected at the dipole, the shield at that
end is no longer ground.

Especially when the length of the coax is about a quarter wavelength,
it will have nothing to do with ground.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.

What coax?

The first dipole was the Hertz dipole. The both legs were fed with the same
frequency but not in phase. The both ends radiate with the same intensity.
The Marconi antenna has only one radiated leg. It is almost in the free
space (masts are high).

Babbling gibberish.

The horizontal dipole radiate in one horizontal direction only. The vertical
in all horizontal directions. But the mast must be very high.
The horizontal, vertical or tilted monopole radiate in all directions. Your
cell phone has the monopole.

More babbling gibberish.


--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

U¿ytkownik "Rob" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.

No Szczepan!
You keep saying that, but it is wrong.

Not me but Wiki:
"The monopole antenna was invented in 1895 by radio pioneer Guglielmo
Marconi, who discovered if he attached one terminal of his transmitter to a
wire suspended in the air and the other to the Earth, he could transmit for
longer distances. For this reason it is sometimes called a Marconi antenna.
Common types of monopole antenna are the whip, rubber ducky, helical, random
wire, inverted-L and T-antenna, mast radiator, and ground plane antennas."

When a coax shield is grounded at one end, and after a considerable
length of coax it is connected at the dipole, the shield at that
end is no longer ground.

Especially when the length of the coax is about a quarter wavelength,
it will have nothing to do with ground.

The "ground plane antenna" is also the monopole:
"To function as a ground plane, the conducting surface must be at least a
quarter of the wavelength (?/4) of the radio waves in size. In lower
frequency antennas, such as the mast radiators used for broadcast antennas,
the Earth itself (or a body of water such as a salt marsh or ocean) is used
as a ground plane. For higher frequency antennas, in the VHF or UHF range,
the ground plane can be smaller, and metal disks, screens or wires are used
as ground planes".

For radioamateurs the one wire is enough.
The dipole is useless for them. They want to "transmit for longer
distances".

But some radioameteurs use the receiving dipole to find the source of
radiation.
S*

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "ground plane antenna" is also the monopole:
"To function as a ground plane, the conducting surface must be at least a
quarter of the wavelength (?/4) of the radio waves in size. In lower
frequency antennas, such as the mast radiators used for broadcast antennas,
the Earth itself (or a body of water such as a salt marsh or ocean) is used
as a ground plane. For higher frequency antennas, in the VHF or UHF range,
the ground plane can be smaller, and metal disks, screens or wires are used
as ground planes".

Note that it does not say that it is sufficient to connect one side
of the antenna to the ground with a wire.
A ground plane is something different than a wire to ground.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...
Not me but Wiki:
"The monopole antenna was invented ...
For radioamateurs the one wire is enough. The dipole is useless for them.
They want to "transmit for longer distances".

S*
Hello old chap.

There is surely no point in posting quotations from Wiki if you do not
understand them.
The comment about dipoles being useless for amateurs is definitely
incorrect. The dipole is a very popular design of antenna for amateur radio
use.

Regards, Rog.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...
Not me but Wiki:
"The monopole antenna was invented ...
For radioamateurs the one wire is enough. The dipole is useless for them.
They want to "transmit for longer distances".

S*

Hello old chap.

There is surely no point in posting quotations from Wiki if you do not
understand them.
The comment about dipoles being useless for amateurs is definitely
incorrect. The dipole is a very popular design of antenna for amateur radio
use.

Regards, Ian.

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .


"Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
...


"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...


On Friday, April 26, 2013 12:38:06 PM UTC-5, Irv Finkleman wrote:
snip

Maybe SB can explain the difference between a monopole with a single
ungrounded radial, and a dipole.

Each radial, grounded or not (but connected to the shield of the coax),
is the ground.
The Earth, the Moon, a satelite and each piece of conductor is ground for
antennas. Radial is one of them.
Ground must be adequate to kW.

What if the single ungrounded quarter wave radial is in line with the
quarter wave radiator?
Is it still a monopole?

# Of course.

Wow...you gave a lot to digest.

Just to understand the discussion, let's address the monopole with one
radial.

Assuming the monopole is 1/4 wave long, and has a 1/4 wave long radial.
The radial is in line with the monopole. Everything is ungrounded.

# The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.


How does that configuration of a monopole with one radial differ from a
dipole?

So a half wave wire broken at the center is a monopole with a single radial
if it is fed directly with coax?
And it is a dipole if it has a balanced feed?

What if the coax feedline has a quarter wave sleeve, open at the antenna but
connected to the coax at the other end?
Is it a monopole or a dipole?

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

U?ytkownik "Rob" napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.

No Szczepan!
You keep saying that, but it is wrong.

Not me but Wiki:
"The monopole antenna was invented in 1895 by radio pioneer Guglielmo
Marconi, who discovered if he attached one terminal of his transmitter to a
wire suspended in the air and the other to the Earth, he could transmit for
longer distances. For this reason it is sometimes called a Marconi antenna.
Common types of monopole antenna are the whip, rubber ducky, helical, random
wire, inverted-L and T-antenna, mast radiator, and ground plane antennas."

This is true but you have no clue what it means as demonstrated by your
babbling gibberish.

When a coax shield is grounded at one end, and after a considerable
length of coax it is connected at the dipole, the shield at that
end is no longer ground.

Especially when the length of the coax is about a quarter wavelength,
it will have nothing to do with ground.

The "ground plane antenna" is also the monopole:
"To function as a ground plane, the conducting surface must be at least a
quarter of the wavelength (?/4) of the radio waves in size. In lower
frequency antennas, such as the mast radiators used for broadcast antennas,
the Earth itself (or a body of water such as a salt marsh or ocean) is used
as a ground plane. For higher frequency antennas, in the VHF or UHF range,
the ground plane can be smaller, and metal disks, screens or wires are used
as ground planes".

This is true but you have no clue what it means as demonstrated by your
babbling gibberish.

For radioamateurs the one wire is enough.
The dipole is useless for them. They want to "transmit for longer
distances".

But some radioameteurs use the receiving dipole to find the source of
radiation.
S*

And all your comments are again babbling gibberish that shows you have
absolutely no understanding of anything you have read.


--
Jim Pennino

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On 4/29/2013 3:50 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
Assuming the monopole is 1/4 wave long, and has a 1/4 wave long radial.
The radial is in line with the monopole. Everything is ungrounded.

The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.

So what would happen if I connected my transmitter, which has a 50 ohm
{ostensibly) output with the hot lead of the coax connected to the
"radial" instead of the "monopole" and similarly with the braid?

Think long about this.

tom
K0TAR

Anyone know where I can find plans for an artificial ground?
 

On 4/29/2013 10:20 PM, tom wrote:
On 4/29/2013 3:50 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Wayne" napisal w wiadomosci
Assuming the monopole is 1/4 wave long, and has a 1/4 wave long radial.
The radial is in line with the monopole. Everything is ungrounded.

The radial connected with the shield of the coax is the ground.

So what would happen if I connected my transmitter, which has a 50 ohm
{ostensibly) output with the hot lead of the coax connected to the
"radial" instead of the "monopole" and similarly with the braid?

Think long about this.

tom
K0TAR




Just to clearly understand where you are on how this really works.

tom
K0TAR