Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Cecil Moore wrote: What we found at the CA shootouts is that when the bottom section runs closely parallel to the vehicle body, as it does with a trailer hitch mount on an SUV, the field strength is much lower than if that bottom section is in the clear, e.g. mounted on the roof of the SUV. That seems to match up with various peoples' experiences that I've heard. Close spacing in this way makes the signal weaker, and also seems to make the antenna more difficult to tune/match properly. This also makes sense from an engineering point of view. The closely-parallel spacing of the bottom section and the metal vehicle body would form a transmission line of sorts. This transmission-line section would not radiate much (or efficiently) - its radiation resistance would be quite low. As a result, the antenna's feedpoint impedance would be lower than otherwise (requiring a more aggressive impedance step-up of some sort to match a 50-ohm line). The coil and whip would be above the body, and would still be able to radiate, but you'd be left with something akin to a bottom-loaded whip with no high-current radiating section, rather than a center-loaded radiator with a low-loss high-current radiating section below the coil. In effect, a close/parallel mounting of this sort would seem to sacrifice much of the radiating power of this type of antenna. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|