Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dan Richardson wrote wrote: What's the matter with 3, equi-spaced radials? Be economical. Save a radial! It looks better too. And there are no arguments about directionality. ---- Reg. Modeling such an arrangement gave no real noticeable difference between using three or four radials. ========================================= Of course it didn't. That's the point I was making. The number of radials, from 1 to N, is immaterial. As N increases there will be a slight improvement in radiating efficiency. The N loss resistances are all in parallel as seen by the feedline. ---- Reg. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Radials | Antenna | |||
Vertical ant gain vs No radials | Antenna | |||
Radials for a Vertical ? | Antenna | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna |