At 09:02 AM 4/7/2005, Al Williams wrote:
>EZNEC shows that this configuration is a barn burner for straight up
>propagation providing about 4 db gain over a single dipole and much
>attenuation at lower elevation angles. However EZNEC shows that raising the
>antennas from 15' to 20/25 adds about 1 db of gain. NVIS articles and 1
>book that I have read say
>that the optimum height is about .2 lambda which agrees with my EZNEC
>modeling. Raising the antennas also makes the input impedance a bit more
>manageable.
>EZNEC doesn't seem to agree with the "...theoretical gain of about 7db" as
>it reports about 10 dbi?
>
>It would seem that this configuration would be especially helpful in areas
>with high ham populations--not so good in Wyoming, etc.
>
>k7puc
A lot of the details are going to depend on what the soil properties are,
and I'd venture that most hams don't have a real good handle on exactly
what they are for their particular site.
When you ran your EZNEC models did you use the sommerfield ground or the
reflection coefficient? (makes a big difference on feed point impedances,
and the corresponding gains)
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|