Home 
Search 
Today's Posts 
#11




Roy Lewallen wrote:
I'll be waiting for your patented noantenna 377 ohm feedline. I wonder if that patent has ever been applied for? :)  73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp = Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News = http://www.newsfeeds.com  The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! == Over 80,000 Newsgroups  16 Different Servers! = 
#12




W5DXP wrote in message ...
Dr. Slick wrote: The funny thing about this, is that you cannot say that the 50 Ohms in the center of the chart is a "resistive" 50 Ohms, as there is very little real resistance in the average antenna. From the IEEE Dictionary: "resistance (1)(B) The real part of impedance." Apparently, all the resistance in the average antenna is real. :)  You misunderstand my point, Cecil. If the antenna is tuned correctly, the "radiation" resistance is a real 50 Ohms, with the V and I waveforms IN PHASE. But, my point is that you can take a DC measurement anywhere on the ideal lossless antenna and you will never see 50 Ohms anywhere, only shorts. Ideally, the antenna never heats up, and has no resistive losses. This is not to say that it won't have a "radiation" resistance of 50 Ohms at the resonant, tuned frequency. And to a transmitter at the resonant frequency, this will electrically appear to be the same thing as an ideal dummy load of 50 Ohms. Roy's message has clarified a few things. Slick 
#13




Dr. Slick wrote:
W5DXP wrote: Apparently, all the resistance in the average antenna is real. :) You misunderstand my point, Cecil. Actually, it was a play on words using your definition of "real" Vs the IEEE Dictionary and mathematical definition of "real". The Devil made me do it but I did provide a smiley face.  73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp = Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News = http://www.newsfeeds.com  The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! == Over 80,000 Newsgroups  16 Different Servers! = 
#14




Dr. Slick wrote:
Why would you need the antenna tuner in this case? Assuming your XMTR is 50 Ohms on the output: 100W XMTR50 ohm feedline+50 ohm load Voila! A perfect match. No mismatchlosses, and no need for a tuner. Yes, but a realworld antenna rarely has a 50 ohm feedpoint impedance even though it is resonant. The feedpoint resistance of a resonant 1/2WL dipole can vary from about 40 ohms to about 100 ohms depending upon its height above ground. And a resonant dipole won't usually cover the entire 75m band without a tuner of some kind.  73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp = Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News = http://www.newsfeeds.com  The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! == Over 80,000 Newsgroups  16 Different Servers! = 
#15




Dr. Slick wrote:
"But, my point is that you can take a DC measurement anywhere on the ideal lossless antenna and you will never see 50 Ohms anywhere, only shorts." True. DC resistance of a lossless wire is zero. But, apply 50 watts rf power to an antenna adjusted to present 50ohms resistance at a particular frequency. What happens? Our loading, adjusted for 50 watts output, produces 50 volts at an inphase current of 50 amps. The 50 watts is being radiated. As far as the transmitter is concerned, the power might just as well be feeding a dummy load. There are several reasons a dc ohmmeter doesn`t read radiation resistance. Once the ohmmeter`s dc has charged the antenna, current flow stops. DC doesn`t radiate. A dc ohmmeter doesn`t even measure the right loss resistance value. Some of the loss resistance in a true antenna with actual losses, comes from skin effect at radio frequencies, where the conduction is forced to the outside of the conductors, decreasing their effective crosssection and increasing their loss. RF also has the ability to induce eddy currents in surrounding conductors and to agitate molecular movement in surrounding insulators. RF thus increases loss over that measured by passing dc through the antenna. Radiation resistance can be readily measured by using an rf bridge instrument. The bridge and antenna are excited by a generator operating at the same frequency the transmitter will use. The bridge will indicate reactance in the antenna, if it is not resonant. The null detector for the bridge is typically a good radio receiver. Radiation resistance is real though it does not heat the antenna. Loss resistance is real though it does heat the antenna and its surroundings. A resistance is a volt to amp ratio in which amps are inphase with the volts. A resistor is a special type of resistance in which the electrical energy applied to the resistance is converted into heat. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI 
#16




Richard Harrison wrote:
What happens? Our loading, adjusted for 50 watts output, produces 50 volts at an inphase current of 50 amps. Hmmmm, 50 watts in, 2500 watts out. How much will you take for that antenna, Richard? :)  73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp = Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News = http://www.newsfeeds.com  The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! == Over 80,000 Newsgroups  16 Different Servers! = 
#17




Roy Lewallen wrote in message ...
I disagree on this point. You can think of an antenna as a type of tranformer, from 50 Ohms to 377 Ohms of free space. A tuned antenna is "matching" 50 to 377 ohms, and will therefore have no reflections, ideally. Thinking of it doesn't make it so. All the energy applied to the antenna is radiated, less loss, regardless of the antenna's feedpoint impedance. How does that fit into your model. What if the antenna was a wire shorting the transmission line? Then there would be very little radiated power, and a lot of reflected power. You can make a transformer to match 50 Ohms to, say, 200 Ohms or so. Why not for 50 to 377? It's just another number. Except in the case of free space, with a given permeability and permittivity, you have the impedance of free space, which doesn't need a transmission line. ok, so perhaps the way to think of it is: when an antenna is matched, the I and V curves what curves? Well, a carrier with a single frequency will be a sinewave, correct? Feeding a real resistive impedance, the V and the I sinewaves will be in phase (no reactance). will be in phase (no reactance), and the product of I*V (integrated) will be the power transmitted. The average power radiated is always the real part of V*I(conjugate). If V and I are in phase, this is simply equal to V*I. But what does this have to do with the confusion between a resistor and resistance? It doesn't really, but it does relate to this discussion. In the sense that V and I will be in phase for either a matched antenna or an ideal dummy load. I suppose what this all means is that if you have a matched antenna, it's V and I curves will be IN PHASE and will have the exact same RMS values as if you had a truly resistive dummy load instead. Yes and no. If you're feeding the antenna with a 450 ohm line, it's matched to the line only if its impedance is 450 + j0 ohms, so it looks like a 450 ohm dummy load, not a 50 ohm one. On the other hand, you can feed a 50 + j0 ohm antenna with a half wavelength of 450 ohm line, and get a perfect 50 ohm match to a transmitter at the input end of the line, while running a 9:1 SWR on the the transmission line. Then either the antenna or the input of the line looks like a 50 ohm dummy load. You could make that half wavelength transmission line almost any other characteristic impedance, like 25 or 200 Ohms, and you would still wind up back at 50 Ohms at the input of the line (but you couldn't change frequencies unless they were multiples of 2 of the fundamental). But the point is, you will still be at 50 Ohms at the input, so the V and I sinewaves should be in phase. Therefore, you can consider the center of the Smith Chart (or the entire real (nonreactive) impedance line) as a real resistance like an ideal dummy load. Do you agree with this statement Roy? Yes. Cool. But a network analyzer looking into a black box will not be able to tell you whether the 50 Ohms it is reading is radiated resistance or dissipated resistance. This seems to be the crux of my question. Now tell me, why can't you just make some 377 ohm transmission line (easy to make) open circuited, and dispense with the antenna altogether? When you figure out the answer to that one, you might begin to see the error with your mental model. Ok by me. I'll be waiting for your patented noantenna 377 ohm feedline. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Why would you need a 377 Ohm feedline for free space, when free space itself is the transmission line?? What's wrong with thinking of an antenna as a type of series Inductor, with a distributed shunt capacitance, that can be thought of as a type of distributed "L" matching network that transforms from 50 Ohms to 377? This is related to how you need to bend the ground radials of a 1/4 WL vertical whip at 45 deg angles down, to get the input impedance closer to 50 Ohms (as opposed to 36 Ohms or something like that if you leave them horizontal). Slick 
#18





#19





Reply 
Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Forum  
Conservation of Energy  Antenna 