At 02:00 AM 7/22/2005, Tom Rauch wrote:
>At 1/8th to 1/4 wl high NVIS signal is maximized. Anyone who
>spent any time at all with antennas would know even with a
>perfect reflector efficiency drops rapidly when the antenna
>is spaced less than 1/10th wl from a reflector, and if the
>reflector (earth) was lossy things would go in the toilet
>fast as height was reduced.
Might well be, though, that a 18" or 2' high wire is much easier to deploy
in a field situation, than trying to get a wire up 1/4 wavelength on 40 or
80? From a system standpoint, you might be willing to accept the lower
efficiency (and the certain interactions with objects likely to be near it)
in exchange for a faster deploy.
Certainly, if it were stormy weather, I'd much rather have an antenna 18"
off the ground than try to put up a 60 foot piece of wire some tens of ft
in the air, as long as the low antenna actually "worked" at all.
The real interesting question might be, how low can you go? Is the
efficiency dropoff a linear gradual decrease from 1/4 wavelength, or is
there some point of diminishing returns where the loss starts to really
increase quickly. Maybe 18" was chosen by the first person to try it
because they happened to have 18" high supports, and that became
legendary. 18" is a convenient height: you can step over it, it's high
enough that you won't trip over it, it's low enough that you won't touch it
with your hands unless you reach down, dogs can run under it.
As far as vehicular NVIS antennas go, there's actually been a fair amount
of theoretical modeling and antenna range testing of various
configurations. Some of this work was to figure out "how do we use what we
already have to best advantage" (i.e. using that big long whip... do we
mount it in front and pull it back, mount in back and pull it forward, put
a hinge in it, bite the bullet and replace it entirely) For instance,
there's a bunch of papers by Austin and his coworkers that are of interest.
(I note that Austin (1998) says: Extensive tests have shown that the
proper antenna for NVIS operation is some form of horizontal element, such
as a lambda/2 dipole at a height of lambda/10 to lambda/4 above the
ground. However, at typical NVIS frequencies, both the length of the
antenna and its height above ground make such systems feasible only in
non-mobile applications. For mobile use, or even in the static mode if
space is severely restricted, non-resonant antennas (i.e. of length
<<lambda/2) must be used.
Austin cites as a reference for the above dipole recommendation a paper by
Hagn and Vincent:
"Comments on the performance of selected low power HF radio sets in the
tropics", IEEE Trans on Veh. Tech." VT-23, 1974, pp 55-58.
I don't have a copy of this particular paper (but I'll get one). However,
I've talked to George Hagn on other topics, and he is a big believer in
experimental methods, so I'll bet that if that paper recommends certain
antenna heights, it was as the result of a lot of tedious testing of
antennas at various heights. However.. one has to be careful, it might be
antennas in a jungle, which may not be representative of typical US NVIS
use. An antenna in a jungle is essentially buried in a dielectric layer,
which looks like a waveguide, and the propagation to a distant point, also
within the jungle, might be carried entirely within the jungle, as opposed
to up to the ionosphere and back down. (That would be all those papers by
Cavalcante, etc. that were discussed on this list a year or so ago)
Whatever it is, the goal on practical antennas for field comm is not
necessarily to make the "best performing antenna", but to make an
"adequately performing antenna" that meets all the other requirements. It
might well be that they're willing to give up 10 dB of loss in exchange for
adding a 500W SSPA. They're not going for maximum miles per milliwatt QRPP
contesting.
_______________________________________________
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
|