Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bill Ogden wrote:
I understand that E and H fields are intrinsic parts of the same thing (for radio waves, etc), and I am not trying to separate them along the lines discussed by some list participants. I would think that the E and H ratio of 377 is a function of the SI units of measurement involved. It would seem that there is the same amount of energy (at different and selected instances) in the E and H waves, and different units of measurement could produce a ratio of 1:1 (or anything else, with appropriate units of measurement). Yes, that's correct. What I tried to do in my explanation was to relate the E/H ratio near a small loop with that of free space. That makes the units of measure immaterial. To return to the ferrite rod antenna: Ignoring the directional null capability (which might be very useful in some real-world circumstances) is there any advantage to a small ferrite rod antenna over a short wire antenna (assuming perfect amplifiers, as needed, following the antennas and assuming 160m or 80m usage)? You get a greater effective aperture (aka "capture area", and directly related to "effective length") from the ferrite rod antenna for a given physical size. This results in a larger signal for a given impinging field strength. If you had perfect amplifiers, that would make no difference, but real amplifiers generate noise, so a larger signal results in a better signal/noise ratio when you're at the level where the amplifier noise dominates the system noise figure. But if the signal level is large enough so that atmospheric noise dominates, having a greater aperture doesn't present any advantage. As mentioned earlier, there have been a number of construction articles over the years explaining how a ferrite rod antenna did wonderful things for 160/80 operation. I have wondered if these results are generally valid, or were the result of the authors' pride in their works, or happened because the directional null abilities solved a local problem. Anecdotal reports of "wonderful things" should always be highly suspect, and placebo effect high on the list of possible causes. It might be easier to get a good null with a ferrite rod antenna than with a casually built antenna of some other kind, and that would be a big potential advantage. When considering the value of anecdotal reports, consider the widely reported benefits of various kinds of speaker cable, and the staggering amount of money that's being extracted from the believers. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Passive Repeater | Antenna | |||
Is magnetic field affected by metal conductor? | Homebrew | |||
F/A New Motorola VHF portable antennas (Motorola Branded!!) | Swap | |||
FA Motorola VHF rubber duck Antennas $4.99 ea. Dealer cost $8.70 List $11.80 | Swap | |||
How was antenna formula for uV/Meter Derived? | Antenna |