Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Short antennae - a reprise
wrote in message
... gareth wrote: wrote in message ... The answer is because the radiation resistance is measured in milliohms and a matching network to match 50 Ohms to milliohms has huge resistive losses. Afraid you've just shot yourself in the foot, there, Old Chap, because the reason that the apparent radiation resistance is so low is because so little is radiated! And it is not the "apparent radiation resistance " it is the real, calculable, and measurably radiation resistance, you gas bag. Why do you have this compulsion to shout out insults in the manner of a 5-year-old? There are two major ways in which the power is dissipated. One is radiation, and the other is the i2r losses in the metal. It is easier for us to model things as though they were resistances, even if they were not. (By the same token is the BJT modelled as a combination of resistances, capacitances and current generators) So, the power that is dissipated as radiation is modelled as though it is a resisitance, although it is not a resistance, but a mechanism by which power is dissipated. In terms of the resistance model, that so-called radiation resistance behaves as though it is a resistance in series with the resistance of the wire, and it matters not what current you manage to force into the antenna, as the antenna shortens, and the apparent radiation resistance decreases, the i2r losses start to dominate, and therefore the short antenna is a poor radiator in not radiating all the power fed to it. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The inefficiency of short antennae compared to long antennae, as previously discussed. | Antenna | |||
Short antennae, et al | Antenna | |||
short antennae | Antenna | |||
The philosophy of short antennae | Antenna | |||
Short Antennae | Antenna |