| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
February 21st 05, 05:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Roy allow me to be a bit more directive regarding my pursuit.
I am trying to see what methods that can be used for maximum gain. Having made many a long boom yagi 80 feet and 13 elements I have come to the cinclusion that thinking must move away from Yagi's. If one starts with a balloon squeezed in the center we get the figure 8 pattern. I think we all can agree on that My logic is that we must find a way to move all the volume at the rear to the front thus increasing the front diameter before we begin to massage it. The present thinking is one sqeeze at the rear is the best that one can do. It is here that I part company with the norm. If we move all the volume to the front then talk of gain/boom length becomes moot. There are other points that I am not happy with regarding antennas in that if we have reprocity how is it that radio rays can arrive at angles as low as 3 degrees? Deflection of radio waves jump right out at you I model quite a bit but models tend to follow the input thinking so I intentially put Yagis aside and mainly revolve around close coupling and clustering of elements but at the same time I am interested in what aproaches have been made with the yagi in removing the rear volume as it were. I am aware that antennas have been studied to death over the years but it is my belief that all these studies started around yagi phillosophy which made them all interdependent. I believe I have arrived at a turning point in my quest and should know in a few days when the weather has cleared up.and I can get on the air for trials. There we have it , no deviation from antennas just one hams thinking who is loathe to follow others. Regards Art "Roy Lewallen" wrote in message ... It should also be mentioned that the front/back ratio is different at snip |
|
#2
February 21st 05, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#4
February 21st 05, 06:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:10:00 GMT, "
wrote: Roy allow me to be a bit more directive regarding my pursuit. I am trying to see what methods that can be used for maximum gain. Having made many a long boom yagi 80 feet and 13 elements I have come to the cinclusion that thinking must move away from Yagi's. If one starts with a balloon squeezed in the center we get the figure 8 pattern. I think we all can agree on that My logic is that we must find a way to move all the volume at the rear to the front thus increasing the front diameter before we begin to massage it. The present thinking is one sqeeze at the rear is the best that one can do. It is here that I part company with the norm. If we move all the volume to the front then talk of gain/boom length becomes moot. This sounds like a place for the horn antenna similar to what we use in microwave communications. You have an interesting approach. I am sure you have considered this, but how well do the multiple reflectors work with the yagi? not so much those in line with the elements as those that form a wall behind the driven element or the first reflector. Buck -- 73 for now Buck N4PGW |
|
#5
February 21st 05, 07:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The idea of 'reflectors' is perhaps the wrong approach, I prefer the term
deflectors as one sees when rays hit a knife edge. Also close coupling enables elements to be current heavy and others voltage heavy such that it would appear that a element was doing nothing when in fact it is the link for more current loaded elements in cluster form. A wall that you suggest can indeed reflect and absorb radio waves but a wall is beyond my means thus resonance remains a important function of change. But then close coupling of elements together with the deflection aproach has been dissed many times over the years with me and always ends in derision of the author Time will tell but experimentation can be enjoyable especially when a trail of past results suggests that my rubicon is at hand and close to submission to RADCOM where experimentation is still valued. Heh, no politics here or religeon so all can join in without fear especially those who are willing to consider and pursue 'outside of the box' ideas that others distain., in order to gain better understanding Regards Art "Buck" wrote in message ... On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:10:00 GMT, " wrote: Roy allow me to be a bit more directive regarding my pursuit. I am trying to see what methods that can be used for maximum gain. Having made many a long boom yagi 80 feet and 13 elements I have come to the cinclusion that thinking must move away from Yagi's. If one starts with a balloon squeezed in the center we get the figure 8 pattern. I think we all can agree on that My logic is that we must find a way to move all the volume at the rear to the front thus increasing the front diameter before we begin to massage it. The present thinking is one sqeeze at the rear is the best that one can do. It is here that I part company with the norm. If we move all the volume to the front then talk of gain/boom length becomes moot. This sounds like a place for the horn antenna similar to what we use in microwave communications. You have an interesting approach. I am sure you have considered this, but how well do the multiple reflectors work with the yagi? not so much those in line with the elements as those that form a wall behind the driven element or the first reflector. If you look at current flow in a corner reflector antenna you will note that rear elements individually carry little current! Food for thought Art Buck -- 73 for now Buck N4PGW |
|
#6
February 22nd 05, 04:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
" bravely wrote to "All" (21 Feb 05 19:20:16)
--- on the heady topic of " F to B and F to rear" How about stuffing a dielectric type material between the elements so that the antenna can be made a lot shorter though it still remains electrically resonnant? How about making antennas 3 dimensional instead of on a single plane? How about using newly discovered materials exploiting their strange new properties.? I don't mean to upset any apple carts but this stuff has been done for almost 200 years and no really new ideas have been introduced since the past half century. A*s*i*m*o*v au From: " au Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:5555 au The idea of 'reflectors' is perhaps the wrong approach, I prefer the au term deflectors au as one sees when rays hit a knife edge. Also close coupling enables au elements to au be current heavy and others voltage heavy such that it would appear au that a element was doing nothing when in fact it is the link for more au current loaded elements au in cluster form. A wall that you suggest can indeed reflect and absorb au radio waves but a au wall is beyond my means thus resonance remains a important function of au change. au But then close coupling of elements together with the deflection au aproach has been au dissed many times over the years with me and always ends in derision au of the author au Time will tell but experimentation can be enjoyable especially when a au trail of past results au suggests that my rubicon is at hand and close to submission to RADCOM au where experimentation is still valued. au Heh, no politics here or religeon so all can join in without fear au especially those who are willing au to consider and pursue 'outside of the box' ideas that others au distain., in order to gain better au understanding au Regards au Art au "Buck" wrote in message au ... On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:10:00 GMT, " wrote: Roy allow me to be a bit more directive regarding my pursuit. I am trying to see what methods that can be used for maximum gain. Having made many a long boom yagi 80 feet and 13 elements I have come to the cinclusion that thinking must move away from Yagi's. If one starts with a balloon squeezed in the center we get the figure 8 pattern. I think we all can agree on that My logic is that we must find a way to move all the volume at the rear to the front thus increasing the front diameter before we begin to massage it. The present thinking is one sqeeze at the rear is the best that one can do. It is here that I part company with the norm. If we move all the volume to the front then talk of gain/boom length becomes moot. .... Acme Corp: Unlimited credit for disadvantaged coyotes. |
|
#7
February 22nd 05, 01:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Asimov
That's right, because every thing is known about antennas And when something new comes along many will say they knew that all the time Art "Asimov" wrote in message ... " bravely wrote to "All" (21 Feb 05 19:20:16) --- on the heady topic of " F to B and F to rear" How about stuffing a dielectric type material between the elements so that the antenna can be made a lot shorter though it still remains electrically resonnant? How about making antennas 3 dimensional instead of on a single plane? How about using newly discovered materials exploiting their strange new properties.? I don't mean to upset any apple carts but this stuff has been done for almost 200 years and no really new ideas have been introduced since the past half century. A*s*i*m*o*v au From: " au Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:5555 au The idea of 'reflectors' is perhaps the wrong approach, I prefer the au term deflectors au as one sees when rays hit a knife edge. Also close coupling enables au elements to au be current heavy and others voltage heavy such that it would appear au that a element was doing nothing when in fact it is the link for more au current loaded elements au in cluster form. A wall that you suggest can indeed reflect and absorb au radio waves but a au wall is beyond my means thus resonance remains a important function of au change. au But then close coupling of elements together with the deflection au aproach has been au dissed many times over the years with me and always ends in derision au of the author au Time will tell but experimentation can be enjoyable especially when a au trail of past results au suggests that my rubicon is at hand and close to submission to RADCOM au where experimentation is still valued. au Heh, no politics here or religeon so all can join in without fear au especially those who are willing au to consider and pursue 'outside of the box' ideas that others au distain., in order to gain better au understanding au Regards au Art au "Buck" wrote in message au ... On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:10:00 GMT, " wrote: Roy allow me to be a bit more directive regarding my pursuit. I am trying to see what methods that can be used for maximum gain. Having made many a long boom yagi 80 feet and 13 elements I have come to the cinclusion that thinking must move away from Yagi's. If one starts with a balloon squeezed in the center we get the figure 8 pattern. I think we all can agree on that My logic is that we must find a way to move all the volume at the rear to the front thus increasing the front diameter before we begin to massage it. The present thinking is one sqeeze at the rear is the best that one can do. It is here that I part company with the norm. If we move all the volume to the front then talk of gain/boom length becomes moot. .... Acme Corp: Unlimited credit for disadvantaged coyotes. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| FT817 front vs. rear connector | Equipment | |||
| FT817 front vs. rear connector | Equipment | |||
| FT817 front vs. rear connector | Equipment | |||
| [OT] Smear campaign against John Kerry | Boatanchors | |||
| BC155 rear port | Scanner | |||
Hybrid Mode
