Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
Setting aside the mistaken belief that even licensees of several years'
standing have that a short antenna will radiate all the power that is fed to it, even long antennae do not do that! Consider the terminated and very-directional Rhombic with legs that are several wavelengths long; the reason for the termination is to absorb the power that does not get radiated and to prevent it being reflected and so making the Rhombic bi-directional instead of uni-directional.. Also, consider the following, if shorter (than the Rhombic) antennae radiate all the power fed to them, there would be no advantage to extending the length of any antenna because the shorter bit would have radiated all the power, and there'd be nothing left for the longer bit to radiate. As it is short (and unterminated) antennae only radiate a small proportion of the power that is fed to them, and that which is not radiated is refelcted back to the feed point considerably out-of-phase with the incident power and so presenting a very reactive impedance. (Yes, OK, on the way back from the reflection, a bit more might get radiated, but I suspect that the out-of-phase wave affects the EM fields thereby reducing the radiative capability) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
On 10/26/2014 7:22 AM, gareth wrote:
Setting aside the mistaken belief that even licensees of several years' standing have that a short antenna will radiate all the power that is fed to it, even long antennae do not do that! You are correct. Antennas have some loss as do all things. Consider the terminated and very-directional Rhombic with legs that are several wavelengths long; the reason for the termination is to absorb the power that does not get radiated and to prevent it being reflected and so making the Rhombic bi-directional instead of uni-directional.. A rhombic antenna is not a short antenna. It is terminated because it is designed to be a traveling-wave antenna and not to be a standing-wave antenna. Please do not compare apples and airplanes. Also, consider the following, if shorter (than the Rhombic) antennae radiate all the power fed to them, there would be no advantage to extending the length of any antenna because the shorter bit would have radiated all the power, and there'd be nothing left for the longer bit to radiate. See my statement above. A rhombic might not radiate all the power fed to it. As you say, it might be terminated by a resistance. However the current in the rhombic will cause radiation from the wires with great efficiency. The purpose of the rhombic is directionality, not efficiency. As it is short (and unterminated) antennae only radiate a small proportion of the power that is fed to them, and that which is not radiated is refelcted back to the feed point considerably out-of-phase with the incident power and so presenting a very reactive impedance. (Yes, OK, on the way back from the reflection, a bit more might get radiated, but I suspect that the out-of-phase wave affects the EM fields thereby reducing the radiative capability) The hallmark of a rhombic is that is long compared to the wavelength of operation in order to achieve directionality (that is, gain in a particular direction). If you wish to discuss the difference between standing-wave antennas and traveling-wave antennas, I would first suggest you learn the difference between the two so that you can carry on an intelligent dialog. Was my response to you abusive? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
gareth wrote:
Setting aside the mistaken belief that even licensees of several years' standing have that a short antenna will radiate all the power that is fed to it, even long antennae do not do that! Ignoring the nonsense about licensees and looking at what physicists have to say about antennas, we find that all antennas radiate all the power applied to them minus any resistive loss. Consider the terminated and very-directional Rhombic with legs that are several wavelengths long; the reason for the termination is to absorb the power that does not get radiated and to prevent it being reflected and so making the Rhombic bi-directional instead of uni-directional.. Also, consider the following, if shorter (than the Rhombic) antennae radiate all the power fed to them, there would be no advantage to extending the length of any antenna because the shorter bit would have radiated all the power, and there'd be nothing left for the longer bit to radiate. A ridiculous conclusiong that totally ignores both antenna pattern and the practical issues involved in feeding very short antennas. As it is short (and unterminated) antennae only radiate a small proportion of the power that is fed to them, and that which is not radiated is refelcted back to the feed point considerably out-of-phase with the incident power and so presenting a very reactive impedance. (Yes, OK, on the way back from the reflection, a bit more might get radiated, but I suspect that the out-of-phase wave affects the EM fields thereby reducing the radiative capability) All a giant pile of babbling, confused nonsense that shows a total lack of understanding of how antennas work. -- Jim Pennino |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
John S wrote in :
The hallmark of a rhombic is that is long compared to the wavelength of operation in order to achieve directionality (that is, gain in a particular direction). It's totally new to me. I just looked at Google images for a few minutes. Nice looking constructions. The thing that struck me most was your description of directionality, non-resonance (at lest, not standing wave), long compared to wavelength, and termination by a resistance. All these things can be said of a Bevarage too, but they're obviously very different too. I don't know what the relation is. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
Lostgallifreyan wrote:
John S wrote in : The hallmark of a rhombic is that is long compared to the wavelength of operation in order to achieve directionality (that is, gain in a particular direction). It's totally new to me. I just looked at Google images for a few minutes. Nice looking constructions. The thing that struck me most was your description of directionality, non-resonance (at lest, not standing wave), long compared to wavelength, and termination by a resistance. All these things can be said of a Bevarage too, but they're obviously very different too. I don't know what the relation is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhombic_antenna http://www.w8ji.com/rhombic_antennas.htm A fair antenna is you have a bunch of telephone poles and a huge piece of empty ground. Otherwise people these days use log-periodics for better performance and a lot smaller footprint. -- Jim Pennino |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
In article ,
Lostgallifreyan wrote: It's totally new to me. I just looked at Google images for a few minutes. Nice looking constructions. The thing that struck me most was your description of directionality, non-resonance (at lest, not standing wave), long compared to wavelength, and termination by a resistance. All these things can be said of a Bevarage too, but they're obviously very different too. I don't know what the relation is. There's a nice discussion of various traveling-wave antennas in Laporte's classic "Radio Antenna Engineering" text. http://snulbug.mtview.ca.us/books/Ra...naEngineering/ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... As usual, Evans is posting malicious nonsense. Once again, you post gratuitous abuse but without venturing a technical contribution yourself He lacks even a grasp of the most basic antenna theory. Once again, you post gratuitous abuse One of his standard ploys is to utter a load of such techno-nonsense. Another is to hurl abuse. He has less pleasant ploys which, hopefully, you will be spared. Once again, you post gratuitous abuse So, M3OSN, are you having a hard time this weekend which has resulted in you lashing out in all directions in every NG that you frequent? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... He has less pleasant ploys which, hopefully, you will be spared. Are you, perhaps, referring to the precedent that you set in 2005 to threaten the liberties and livelihoods of those who did no more than to openly disagree with you on Usenet by sending for them to be arrested by the ploddery? Did it not occur to you that your victims could end up getting the sack from their jobs when you did that? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Myths and Legends of Antennae
En el artículo , John S
escribió: Was my response to you abusive? He won't have liked it, ergo, yes. -- (\_/) (='.'=) (")_(") |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The inefficiency of short antennae compared to long antennae, as previously discussed. | Antenna | |||
Minimum Wage Myths? Typical Media Misinformation? | Shortwave | |||
Welcome to Legends 1680AM Radio | Shortwave | |||
Reality, "Slippery Facts, and Myths | Policy | |||
Jon Cunningham reposts old urban legends | Shortwave |