Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 14:27:37 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: Incidentally, ground loss is not only smaller in sea water, it is also smaller with soil resistivities of several thousand ohms and greater. There's a maximum somewhere in between. Hi George, The statement above falls into the category of "Old Wives' Tales." Given the choice for conductors, Sea Water ranks 6 or 7 orders of magnitude in worse conductivity than any metal (or even carbon) you would care to pick. By this logic, you should do everything in your power to operate in an open pit coal mine. ;-) . . . It's not an "old wives' tale" at all. We have to remember that there are two loss mechanisms involved with antennas. One is the resistance encountered by ground current flowing to one of the feedline terminals in a ground-mounted antenna. This can be reduced to an arbitrarily small value by installing radials. The other is loss incurred when the field strikes the ground and reflects. This second loss is generally negligible for horizontally polarized antennas except at high radiation angles, but is very significant for verticals at low angles. This loss occurs mainly beyond the far edge of most radial fields, so there's usually nothing you can do to reduce the reflection loss except to move the antenna. Perfectly conducting ground has no loss, and perfectly insulating ground has no loss. When considering ground system loss (resistance encountered by local ground currents), the loss is maximum somewhere in between. Doing some experimental modeling with EZNEC/4 (NEC-4 based), I've found that the maximum loss for a radial ground system in the HF range unfortunately hits somewhere around average soil conductivity. It's not an abrupt maximum -- the loss varies fairly gently with conductivity. Reflection loss has to be considered a little differently. While the same statement about perfectly conducting and perfectly insulating ground is still true, if you had perfectly insulating ground, radiated power would be lost to useful radiation by penetrating the ground, whether or not it got dissipated as heat. (In reality, it would of course eventually get dissipated, since no ground is perfectly insulating.) Looking just at the amount of radiation that ends up above the horizon, and neglecting conductive ground current loss, the reflection "loss" does indeed seem to increase monotonically as the ground conductivity decreases. The ground reflection loss can easily be evaluated with any version of EZNEC, including the demo. Choose a vertical antenna such as example file Vert1.ez, set the ground type to Real/MININEC, wire loss to zero, and the plot type to 3D. There should be no resistive loads in the model. Then look at the Average Gain shown at the bottom of the main window after doing a plot calculation. The deviation from a value of 1 (0 dB) represents the fraction of the applied power that's lost in the ground reflection. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna |