WD4ELG wrote:
1. What is the actual performance?
2. Why the stark difference with the different ground model selections
The actual performance should be very close to that predicted when using
the real ground. The reason you get a wrong answer using the Mininec
ground is because you violated one of the rules for use of the program,
a low horizontal wire over a Mininec ground. Read the help file on
"Modeling grounds".
Jerry, K4SAV
Mark Lunday wrote:
> Happy Holidays to all;
>
> I am using EZNEC v5, simulating a full wave horizontal loop on 160 meters,
> square shape, fed in the middle of one of the four sides, height is low to
> the ground (5 feet up).
>
> If I use EZNEC real ground, ground type MININEC, it shows an
> omni-directional pattern resembling a quarter wave vertical pattern shape,
> with unrealistic gain (on the order of +13dBi) at 37 degrees.
>
> If I use EZNEC real ground, high accuracy ground, it shows the same pattern
> shape but with the opposite result of an unrealistic gain of MINUS 8.91 dbi
> at 37 degrees.
>
> My intuition says it should have been perpendicular to the plane of the
> horizontal antenna, basically NVIS.
>
> I am curious to hear opinions/feedback on the following:
>
> 1. What is the actual performance?
> 2. Why the stark difference with the different ground model selections
>
> Thanks
>
> Mark Lunday
> WD4ELG
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
|