![]() |
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
Ralph Mowery wrote:
wrote in message ... I've done a lot of modeling with V's and inverted V's. Except for a slight diffenence due to ground effects at low heights, there is no difference between them. As the angle goes from 180 degrees, i.e. a dipole, the impedance goes down and and the pattern spreads out. I have not played with the programs , but often wondered what the effect is on antennas that are suported on the ends and the middle is dropped in a U or V shape and not the inverted V shape. Many antenna books and articals seem to show the flat top and inverted V paterns, but I have not seen any with the actual V type. Like I said, there is no difference in free space between a V and an inverted V. There are slight differences when close to ground. -- Jim Pennino |
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
|
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
|
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
John S wrote:
On 10/12/2014 1:21 PM, wrote: John S wrote: On 10/11/2014 12:51 PM, wrote: John S wrote: snip OK, so lets analyze my results: Conditions are free space, wire is #14 gauge but may have zero ohms where noted. The antenna is a dipole with the source connected at the center, F=7MHz. I'm using EZNEC with a source of 1 watt. Antenna resonance plays no part in this. # segments = 99 unless otherwise noted. Lambda Wire Rin Gavg(dbi) Gmax(dbi) Efficiency 0.5 zero 80 0 2.16 100% 0.5 #14 73.6 -.09 2.08 98% 0.25 zero 13.2 0 1.85 100% 0.25 #14 13.7 -.17 1.69 96% 0.125 zero 3 0 1.78 100% 0.125 #14 3.25 -.33 1.45 93% 0.05 zero .464 0 1.76 100% 0.05 #14 .556 -.78 0.98 83% Rin is the terminal resistance only. Gave is the average gain integrated over the pattern, Gmax is the highest gain detected. Unless I have done something wrong, I see that a dipole that is .05 wavelengths long is within 20% of being as efficient as a half-wave dipole. Even including wire resistance. I invite discussion in any case. The diameter of #14 solid wire is 0.0641"; how about a line for #8, which is 0.1285"? 0.05 #8 0.515 -.41 1.36 91.1% Free space, no ground loss. So it seems that a .05 lamda dipole is only about 7% less efficient than a full size dipole wit suitable wire... So much for "short antennas are not efficient". (snip extraneous input) Yes, Jim, that is so. In fact, that was the hidden reason for the exercise. I was hoping this would provide an example to let others know that it is not the antenna length that is the problem as Gareth proposed. I was hoping that others would take the investigation into their own hands as a result. I noted that you tried to foul me up with the unreasonable wire size. EZNEC has a nice warning feature to take care of it. What "unreasonable wire size"? #8 wire is readily available and often used to make antenna elements, as is 1/8 th aluminum, which is only a few thousands of an inch different. Or are you refering to issues with segmentation and fat, short wires which I thought I had warned you about? -- Jim Pennino |
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
Lostgallifreyan wrote:
Lostgallifreyan wrote in : Seconded. I'll admit at this point welcoming an easy start, and a prepared example of this would be a hell of an incentive for me to get into exploring NEC too. Actually to be fair, with ,y longwire tests I'll likely be using very thin strong stainless wire and pulling it tight enough to reduce my need to worry about it much. STill interesting though, I've seen heavy-looking HF antennas strung over the apex of a roof in a valley near here, and that had a pronounced sag that may or may not have been bothersome to whoever owned it. You might want to read this before you put up stainless steel wi http://www.mwrs.org.au/2011/06/23/an...eel-vs-copper/ There is a link to a report in there. -- Jim Pennino |
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
Lostgallifreyan wrote:
wrote in : I doubt you will see any significant difference. I've done a lot of modeling with V's and inverted V's. Except for a slight diffenence due to ground effects at low heights, there is no difference between them. Fair enough. I've seen antennas loaded down with feedline but given that V forms are used well, the slight V in those cases, let alone some sag, might not be a concern for me. My main interest came out of my wish to try a befavare antenna I can install almost as fast as I can run the distance. That one would have no support over at least a half mile, and I don't yet know whether it will be mechanically sound till I finish designing and making it. A half mile is a long distance. I hope you have the equations for the sag and tension on the wire at hand and run through them first. As I recall, both charts and calculators can be found on the 'net. -- Jim Pennino |
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
|
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
wrote in :
You might want to read this before you put up stainless steel wi http://www.mwrs.org.au/2011/06/23/an...eel-vs-copper/ There is a link to a report in there. I will, but I have also seen several claims that at least for listenign purposes, stainless isn't so bad, and that except when driving an antenna with power, it may not matter what metal is used. No worries though, it's cheap, I've got it, and I'll try it. :) If it fails, I'll get some hard-drawn copper. |
OK, let's discuss dipoles vs length
Lostgallifreyan wrote:
wrote in : You might want to read this before you put up stainless steel wi http://www.mwrs.org.au/2011/06/23/an...eel-vs-copper/ There is a link to a report in there. I will, but I have also seen several claims that at least for listenign purposes, stainless isn't so bad, and that except when driving an antenna with power, it may not matter what metal is used. No worries though, it's cheap, I've got it, and I'll try it. :) If it fails, I'll get some hard-drawn copper. Claims are like belly buttons; everyone has one. These guys did an actual study. If nothing else, the stainless could be used as a support for the copper. -- Jim Pennino |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com