| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Radials
"John S" wrote in message ... : 0 deg 1.09 dBi @ 12.5 deg 30 deg 1.37 dBi @ 12.5 deg 45 deg 1.66 dBi @ 12.5 deg I would appreciate a definition of gain as used in this thread. I have a hard time understanding how a passive device can supply gain. Thanks, John If you look above you will see dBi. That is dB over an isotropic antenna. That type of antenna is not possiable to make, but a math modle. It is single point where the power is radiated from equally in all directions. To get "gain" you take some of the power in some directions and put in another direction. For sake of discussion, look at a simple dipole. There will not be much radiation off the ends of the antenna so there will be more at right angles to the wire. The differance is the 'gain'. As I mentioned, gain by its self does not help and can actually hirt the signal if it is not in the right direction. The gain of the verticals , unless designed for a certain distance, does not mean much unless you can tilt it so the maximum gain lobe is heading in the direction you want. At field day one fellow was always wanting to put up an extended double Zep for the low bands. He talked about the gain. While it has gain in some directioins, it has 'loss' or 'negative gain' in others, but he was not thinking about that, just raw gain numbers. I have up a 3 element beam for 20, 15,10 meters and also an off center fed antenna that is about 125 feet long near the same height. On 20 meters in some directions the OCF and beam are at almost the same strength. At others, there is around 20 dB of differance.. It is just not practical to rotate that OCF. If it was, I would just use it. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
Radials
Wimpie wrote:
El 04-04-14 2:35, escribió: snip Yep, but it isn't a GP antenna which by definition has a radiator about 1/4 lambda. I understand your reasoning, but do a google (image) search on "GPA antenna" and you we see that many people don't follow your convention. 5/8 and 1/2 WL are also included. It is not the name, but the operating princple that is of importance. Sorry, I follow what engineering text books say, not what some Google search algorithm comes up with. snip You will have common mode currents of some magnitude with ANY GP type antenna. Clear, but by using a half wave radiator (end-fed) CM current is about 13 dB lower to start with, and that saves me a lot of aluminum that doesn't contribute to the radiation. Again, I know design/construction is more elaborate. Did you include the coax shield in your simulation? All antennas connected with coax will have a long conductor consisting of the coax shield running from the radials to about ground. You will be hard pressed to notice 1 dB difference in a typical amateur system. that was the reason I mentioned: "The effect of sloping angle on zero elevation gain is small, and you get hardly measurable more gain when they are almost vertical. Sloping radials have some other advantage: less birds." The biggest advantage to sloping radials is they move the impedance from 20 Ohms to much closer to 50 Ohms. I still can't reproduce, or find a reliable reference for your 3.67 dbi for a quarter wave with quarter wave 85 degr sloping radials. This will make the third time I will say that number is probably the result of small angles and closely spaced wires, i.e. garbage. We drifted away somewhat from Irv's posting.... -- Jim Pennino |
Radials
John S wrote:
On 4/3/2014 7:37 PM, wrote: Ralph Mowery wrote: wrote in message ... Note than because we are now over real ground vertical lobes are formed. Again I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to get the demo EZNEC and view the graphs. droop impedance max gain length SWR 0 deg 22.6 Ohms 2.48 dBi @ 35 deg .245373 lambda 2.12 30 deg 43.4 Ohms 2.24 dBi @ 40 deg .236269 lambda 1.15 45 deg 51.1 Ohms 1.94 dBi @ 45 deg .231667 lambda 1.022 It should be noted that there is a large second lobe: 0 deg 1.09 dBi @ 12.5 deg 30 deg 1.37 dBi @ 12.5 deg 45 deg 1.66 dBi @ 12.5 deg So which antenna is "best" in the real world? I would go for 5% longer radials drooping at 45 degress. Now we are getting somewhere in the discussion. For simple antennas that can not be rotated unless one wants to talk to a certain distance, the antenna does not make much if any differance. You get 'gain' in one direction and 'loss' in another. Just match it to the coax and take what you get. There is no real gain in an antenna, just redirecting the power that is supplied to it. And there is no such thing as cold, just the absense of heat... Hi, Jim - I would appreciate a definition of gain as used in this thread. I have a hard time understanding how a passive device can supply gain. Thanks, John By definition. Antenna gain is defined as the ratio of the maximum field strength in the far field compared to the field strength of an isotropic radiator expressed in decibels. That is dBi. Some times the comparison is to a dipole, in which case it is dBd. FYI the gain of a lossless dipole is 2.15 dBi. An isotropic radiator is a theoretical antenna that produces a perfectly spherical pattern. -- Jim Pennino |
Radials
On Friday, April 4, 2014 12:26:30 PM UTC-5, wrote:
A 5/8 system mounted at 13 feet (top of an average house) will have a squarish pattern with a maximum of 4.4 dBi and a minimum of 2.2 dBi. A 1/4 system at the same height has a circular pattern of 4.9 dBi. In both cases the major elevation lobe is at 20 degrees. Free space patterns can look wonderfull, but unless you live on the ISS your antenna is going to be mounted over ground. True, but all mine have been at 36-40 feet up, so the numbers change a bit. When I modeled them all, I used a height of 40 ft, and "avg" ground if I remember right. At 40 ft, the 1/4 GP with sloping radials gave a max 3.003 dbi at 9 degrees. The 1/2 wave gave a max 3.831 dbi at 8 degrees. The 5/8 with straight 1/4 radials, 4.293 dbi at 39 degrees.. Not good. :( The 5/8 with 45 degree sloping 5/8 radials, 4.941 dbi at 8 degrees. The same with even steeper sloping radials, 5.334 dbi at 9 degrees. |
Radials
On Friday, April 4, 2014 11:58:29 AM UTC-5, Wimpie wrote:
Other thing with the half wave end-fed can be absorption of the plastic insulation. To make UV-resistant black they frequently use carbon black. When the concentration is too high the dissipation factor of the plastic increases signficantly. Recently I had really weird results with a half wave monopole design. Everything went wrong. It was the black UV-stabilized HMPE plastic containing around 2.5% carbon black. When changing to green HMPE everything was according to my calculations. All my 1/2 waves have been made from aluminum tubing, and fed with the gamma loop type matching scheme. They worked very well, and my final version had a decoupling section with a lower set of radials. But all the variations of 5/8 antennas did even better on 10m local paths. |
Radials
|
Radials
El 04-04-14 19:35, escribió:
wrote: El 04-04-14 2:35, escribió: snip Yep, but it isn't a GP antenna which by definition has a radiator about 1/4 lambda. I understand your reasoning, but do a google (image) search on "GPA antenna" and you we see that many people don't follow your convention. 5/8 and 1/2 WL are also included. It is not the name, but the operating princple that is of importance. Sorry, I follow what engineering text books say, not what some Google search algorithm comes up with. I know the "classical" definition, but we live in 2014, and when the scope of some definitions changed over the last 20..30 years, it is good to know how they changed to avoid misunderstandings. Visit some antenna manufacturer's websites and see what changed over the years (that doesn't mean that I agree with them). snip You will have common mode currents of some magnitude with ANY GP type antenna. Clear, but by using a half wave radiator (end-fed) CM current is about 13 dB lower to start with, and that saves me a lot of aluminum that doesn't contribute to the radiation. Again, I know design/construction is more elaborate. Did you include the coax shield in your simulation? All antennas connected with coax will have a long conductor consisting of the coax shield running from the radials to about ground. I am familiar with Common Mode issues and how to measure, model and simulate them. The number quoted is from both measurement and simulation. You will be hard pressed to notice 1 dB difference in a typical amateur system. that was the reason I mentioned: "The effect of sloping angle on zero elevation gain is small, and you get hardly measurable more gain when they are almost vertical. Sloping radials have some other advantage: less birds." The biggest advantage to sloping radials is they move the impedance from 20 Ohms to much closer to 50 Ohms. I still can't reproduce, or find a reliable reference for your 3.67 dbi for a quarter wave with quarter wave 85 degr sloping radials. This will make the third time I will say that number is probably the result of small angles and closely spaced wires, i.e. garbage. Sorry, I didn't notice that. We drifted away somewhat from Irv's posting.... -- Wim PA3DJS Please remove abc first in case of PM |
Radials
In article ,
Wimpie wrote: I know the "classical" definition, but we live in 2014, and when the scope of some definitions changed over the last 20..30 years, it is good to know how they changed to avoid misunderstandings. Visit some antenna manufacturer's websites and see what changed over the years (that doesn't mean that I agree with them). 1. There are industry standards, but some antenna manufacturers use numbers and definitions to make their products more attractive. That has not changed over the last many years. 2. The feature that defines a ground plane antenna is the ground plane, not the vertical element. 3. Ground is relatively flat. Drooping radials to approximate a sleeve dipole is stretching the definition of a ground plane! Fred K4DII |
Radials
Fred McKenzie wrote:
In article , Wimpie wrote: I know the "classical" definition, but we live in 2014, and when the scope of some definitions changed over the last 20..30 years, it is good to know how they changed to avoid misunderstandings. Visit some antenna manufacturer's websites and see what changed over the years (that doesn't mean that I agree with them). 1. There are industry standards, but some antenna manufacturers use numbers and definitions to make their products more attractive. That has not changed over the last many years. 2. The feature that defines a ground plane antenna is the ground plane, not the vertical element. 3. Ground is relatively flat. Drooping radials to approximate a sleeve dipole is stretching the definition of a ground plane! The Radials of a ground plane antenna work entirely differently than the sleeve in a sleeve dipole, drooping or otherwise. -- Jim Pennino |
Radials
On Friday, April 4, 2014 9:16:01 PM UTC-5, Fred McKenzie wrote:
3. Ground is relatively flat. Drooping radials to approximate a sleeve dipole is stretching the definition of a ground plane! The best modeled version of the 5/8 with 5/8 radials scheme, I consider more of a dual 5/8 collinear than a 5/8 ground plane. You don't get the full 5.1 dbi free space gain of the straight collinear, but you get fairly close. But.. I don't really care about the name.. Just as long as they work. :) |
Radials
|
Radials
|
Radials
In article ,
Ian Jackson wrote: I understand that my 2m 5/8 mobile antenna (on a magmount) is essentially electrically a 6/8 (ie a 3/4 wave - hence a good match). The actual whip is around 5/8, and the other 1/8 is the 3-turn spring steel 'loading' coil at the bottom end. Again my understanding is that a 5/8 gives the maximum broadside gain (a tiddly bit more oomph than a 1/2 wave), and if you make the antenna longer, the predominant broadside lobe collapses, and most of radiation moves to the higher angle lobe. I read somewhere that the maximum gain toward the horizon, was obtained with a 0.58 wavelength vertical element rather than 5/8 (0.625). The advantage of a 5/8 antenna with a flat ground plane, is that its impedance is capacitive with a 50 Ohm resistive component. A small inductor (loading coil) cancels the capacitance. Fred K4DII |
Radials
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , writes Fred McKenzie wrote: In article , Wimpie wrote: I know the "classical" definition, but we live in 2014, and when the scope of some definitions changed over the last 20..30 years, it is good to know how they changed to avoid misunderstandings. Visit some antenna manufacturer's websites and see what changed over the years (that doesn't mean that I agree with them). 1. There are industry standards, but some antenna manufacturers use numbers and definitions to make their products more attractive. That has not changed over the last many years. 2. The feature that defines a ground plane antenna is the ground plane, not the vertical element. 3. Ground is relatively flat. Drooping radials to approximate a sleeve dipole is stretching the definition of a ground plane! The Radials of a ground plane antenna work entirely differently than the sleeve in a sleeve dipole, drooping or otherwise. I would question 'entirely'. In my simplistic ignorance, I would have thought that as you increase the angle of dangle, one kind of morphs into the other. Does bread dough "morph" into bread when you bake it or does it become something different? A sleeve dipole is a dipole with a skinny and fat element. The fat element is also a common mode choke. A ground plane antenna is a monopole mounted over ground. The common usage is that a GP uses an artificial ground consisting of radials. -- Jim Pennino |
Radials
On Saturday, April 5, 2014 8:40:31 AM UTC-5, Fred McKenzie wrote:
In article , Ian Jackson wrote: I understand that my 2m 5/8 mobile antenna (on a magmount) is essentially electrically a 6/8 (ie a 3/4 wave - hence a good match). The actual whip is around 5/8, and the other 1/8 is the 3-turn spring steel 'loading' coil at the bottom end. Again my understanding is that a 5/8 gives the maximum broadside gain (a tiddly bit more oomph than a 1/2 wave), and if you make the antenna longer, the predominant broadside lobe collapses, and most of radiation moves to the higher angle lobe. I read somewhere that the maximum gain toward the horizon, was obtained with a 0.58 wavelength vertical element rather than 5/8 (0.625). I'm not sure if that gives the maximum gain vs a .64 wave, but it gives the cleanest pattern, with the least radiation skewing upwards. So most of the AM broadcasters that use 5/8 radiators prefer them on the shorter side from what I've read. The advantage of a 5/8 antenna with a flat ground plane, is that its impedance is capacitive with a 50 Ohm resistive component. A small inductor (loading coil) cancels the capacitance. I didn't see much if any changes in the loading coil no matter what I did for radials. IE: I used the same coil for all of them, and never had to change it when I added longer radials, etc. I did not use a grounded coil. I just ran it in series. That way I was able to use the antenna on 30m as a 1/4 wave. And the same when I had the full size 40m 1/4 GP. I also used it on 17m as a 5/8 GP, and used a 24v relay to bypass the coil for 40m. That way I could switch from the shack. Kinda hard to reach when the base of the GP is 36 ft up.. lol.. I used a full size 32 ft aluminum radiator, with the tip made of car whip to reduce weight and wind load. The lower tubing was double walled to be stronger. Almost 70 ft to the top of that thing. It kicked butt on 40 and 17 both. :) Good on 40m DX late at night, and I was running a KW+ on top of that, just to make sure I browned the food across the ponds. I also had a 40m horizontal dipole at 36 ft, and to DX, the vertical was usually about 2 S units better to the U.S. coasts, and often 4 S units better across the pond. The longer the path, the better the vertical did. Also had a good ground wave, which was often noticed in the daytime. |
Radials
El 05-04-14 9:46, Ian Jackson escribió:
In message , writes On Friday, April 4, 2014 9:16:01 PM UTC-5, Fred McKenzie wrote: 3. Ground is relatively flat. Drooping radials to approximate a sleeve dipole is stretching the definition of a ground plane! The best modeled version of the 5/8 with 5/8 radials scheme, I consider more of a dual 5/8 collinear than a 5/8 ground plane. You don't get the full 5.1 dbi free space gain of the straight collinear, but you get fairly close. But.. I don't really care about the name.. Just as long as they work. :) I understand that my 2m 5/8 mobile antenna (on a magmount) is essentially electrically a 6/8 (ie a 3/4 wave - hence a good match). The actual whip is around 5/8, and the other 1/8 is the 3-turn spring steel 'loading' coil at the bottom end. Again my understanding is that a 5/8 gives the maximum broadside gain (a tiddly bit more oomph than a 1/2 wave), and if you make the antenna longer, the predominant broadside lobe collapses, and most of radiation moves to the higher angle lobe. The "theoretical" more gain for a 5/8 lambda radiator over a half wave dipole is only valid when towards the direction of reception, you have a fully constructive image antenna in the ground. To fullfill this: 1# The elevation angle needs to be well above the (pseudo) brewster angle, to make sure that the ground reflection is strong and more or less in phase. 2# The ground plane needs to cover at least about the first Fresnel zone as seen from the negative image antenna towards the reciever. When you look to real far field patterns of 5/8 lambda antennas as used in AM broadcast over land, the pattern only matches the theoretical pattern for elevation angle say above 5..10 degr (depending on soil type). For lower elevation, you are below the brewster angle and then the effect of the negative image becomes more destructive with decreasing elevation, hence decreasing gain. For HF, VHF and higher, the ground plane will never meet 2#. To meet this, the ground plane (metallic plane) needs to extend from the transmitter towards the receiver. You can't count mother earth as constructive ground as that serves as a destructive image as the elevation angle is well below the (pseudo) Brewster angle. For mobile LOS use, the advantage of the 5/8 lambda is not in the gain, but in its heigth, as propagation in a mobile path is roughly spoken proportional to h^2. So when the current center goes from 2.5 m (quarter wave on a car, 2 m band) to 3.3 m (5/8 lambda on same car), you win 2.4 dB. For a base station where the ground provision (for example 4 quarter wave radials) is already many lambda above mother earth, the additional gain due to the increased length is mininmal. -- Wim PA3DJS Please remove abc first in case of PM |
Radials
On 4/7/2014 8:54 AM, Wimpie wrote:
El 05-04-14 9:46, Ian Jackson escribió: In message , writes On Friday, April 4, 2014 9:16:01 PM UTC-5, Fred McKenzie wrote: 3. Ground is relatively flat. Drooping radials to approximate a sleeve dipole is stretching the definition of a ground plane! The best modeled version of the 5/8 with 5/8 radials scheme, I consider more of a dual 5/8 collinear than a 5/8 ground plane. You don't get the full 5.1 dbi free space gain of the straight collinear, but you get fairly close. But.. I don't really care about the name.. Just as long as they work. :) I understand that my 2m 5/8 mobile antenna (on a magmount) is essentially electrically a 6/8 (ie a 3/4 wave - hence a good match). The actual whip is around 5/8, and the other 1/8 is the 3-turn spring steel 'loading' coil at the bottom end. Again my understanding is that a 5/8 gives the maximum broadside gain (a tiddly bit more oomph than a 1/2 wave), and if you make the antenna longer, the predominant broadside lobe collapses, and most of radiation moves to the higher angle lobe. The "theoretical" more gain for a 5/8 lambda radiator over a half wave dipole is only valid when towards the direction of reception, you have a fully constructive image antenna in the ground. To fullfill this: 1# The elevation angle needs to be well above the (pseudo) brewster angle, to make sure that the ground reflection is strong and more or less in phase. 2# The ground plane needs to cover at least about the first Fresnel zone as seen from the negative image antenna towards the reciever. When you look to real far field patterns of 5/8 lambda antennas as used in AM broadcast over land, the pattern only matches the theoretical pattern for elevation angle say above 5..10 degr (depending on soil type). For lower elevation, you are below the brewster angle and then the effect of the negative image becomes more destructive with decreasing elevation, hence decreasing gain. For HF, VHF and higher, the ground plane will never meet 2#. To meet this, the ground plane (metallic plane) needs to extend from the transmitter towards the receiver. You can't count mother earth as constructive ground as that serves as a destructive image as the elevation angle is well below the (pseudo) Brewster angle. For mobile LOS use, the advantage of the 5/8 lambda is not in the gain, but in its heigth, as propagation in a mobile path is roughly spoken proportional to h^2. So when the current center goes from 2.5 m (quarter wave on a car, 2 m band) to 3.3 m (5/8 lambda on same car), you win 2.4 dB. For a base station where the ground provision (for example 4 quarter wave radials) is already many lambda above mother earth, the additional gain due to the increased length is mininmal. Excellent information, Wim. Thanks. John, KD5YI |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:50 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com