Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I understand there are measurement issues (and certainly assumption
issues for Rrad). Isn't is fairly certain that increasing the number of radials (of proper length) until the feedpoint R (at resonance, at the antenna) no longer drops, is a reasonable approximation of "high efficiency"? The only issue I see, is determining the target Rrad to compare it to when trying to "estimate" efficiency. Are you saying (for example), that the feedpoint R of a 1/4 w vertical against perfect ground cannot be reliably estimated at 37 ohms? If it can, then isn't 37/R a measure of efficiency? Again, I'm thinking of the efficiency of the ground system... I have no way to look at field strength. Is it really possible to reduce ground losses to the absolute minimum and not have a corresponding increase in field strength? This is starting to turn into "black magic" for me. I can understand questioning a particular "number" for efficiency based on the simplistic Rrad/R formula. If the implications go further...indicating there is no meaning to Rrad/R, then I'm lost. Perhaps the issue is that it's known how to maximize efficiency, it's just completely unknown what that efficiency really is, and there is no simple way to measure it. If that's what your saying, then I understand. That position does seem to muddy up the "how many radials and of what length" efficiency info presented in ON4UN's book and referenced in other texts. They all seem to acccept some sort of accuracy for the Rrad/R formula with 1/4 w verticals. If I understand you correctly, the formula is rejected outright as hopelessly simplistic, and of no particular value. Do I have it now? If so, I'll refrain from using it in the future. I had always assumed that a NEC model of a perfectly conducting monopole above a perfect ground would provide the radiation resistance. For example, considering your antenna of 18.3 m at 3.62 MHz, the input impedance is 27.5 - j 64.7. The radiation resistance would therefore be 27.5 ohms. This appears to be fairly close to your estimate of 25.4 ohms. Frank |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Radials | Antenna | |||
Question on antenna symantics | Antenna |