About Us

November 14th 03, 05:28 PM

oSaddam (Yuri Blanarovich) wrote in message

Mike,
to put in perspective, and I tried to point out in the course of threading this
thread, the significance is this:

1. Impact on effciency - efficiency is roughly proportional to the area under
the current curve over the radiator. When the current drop across the coil is
significant, that "eats" the portion of the curve and the curve above the coil
is much smaller (cosine or triangle shape), less efficiency

Sure, it's called varying stinger heights, or varying capacitance. The
less stinger you have, the less current will be pulled through the
coil. Thats the way I see it anyway. If you noticed a taper across a
coil, what would you do about it? How are you going to improve the
antenna, if #1 , the coil is already as high as you can place it, and
#2, the stinger is as long as you can make it.

2. Understanding the effect allows to better optimize the antenna performance,
be it through modeling or experimenting and measuring.

How? I don't see how we can improve over what we are using. We are
already using the optimum coil placement if we want that. Vertload can
tell you that very quickly.

That's why top hats look
so good. We are not talking just fraction of dB, on low bands that shows as 10s of dBs on signal.

Huh? Top hats work well, because of a current taper across the coil?
Top hats don't model properly because of a current taper across a
coil? I'm confused...

3. Proper modeling in software will allow better design and optimization. See
case of linear loaded 80m KLM beam vs. modified with loading coils, big
difference in pattern and gain and performance.

Where would I see this? Normally, I would expect the lumped coil
version to be the most efficient if quality coils are used...

4. If the modeling software can not capture the effect, than your designs of
multielement loaded antennas are off.

Thats a big if though...I've already shown that the likely error from
this "taper" would most likely be so small to be unnoticed. So far, no
one has shown it to be otherwise.

This exercise already opened my eyes wider and after I test the designs, I will
hopefully come up with some better mobile antennas.

Yuri

Thats the bottom line. But I still feel I'm already building mine as
well as they can be. MK

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole.	Serge Stroobandt, ON4BAA	Antenna	8	February 24th 11 10:22 PM
Smith Chart Quiz	Radio913	Antenna	315	October 21st 03 05:31 AM
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna	Serge Stroobandt, ON4BAA	Antenna	12	October 16th 03 07:44 PM
Eznec modeling loading coils?	Roy Lewallen	Antenna	11	August 18th 03 02:40 AM

Menu

About Us