Modeling is a great tool for predicting antenna performance, but it is only
one tool in our arsenal, not the only tool.. In the article link I sent
out earlier, it was not "someone's guess", but information based on actual
measurements. When modeling, there is always the chance of an incorrect
assumption or leaving out one of the variables etc. In this case, I would
take Kent's measurements and see if the modeling program predicts the same
results. If not, adjusting the model would be in order. Once the model is
adjusted to predict the same results as the actual, real world
measurements, then one can scale the frequencies and materials sizes and
see what the model predicts using Richard's antennas. -- 73, Mike, WV2ZOW
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:07 PM <john@kk9a.com> wrote:
> Good advice, it is always best to model it to see the true interaction
> instead of relying on someone's guess.
>
> John KK9A
>
>
> Jim jimw7ry wrote:
> Yes.
>
> I had to turn my 4 element 90 degrees from my tribander to keep it from
> effecting it. According to the modeling program that K5GO used.
>
> Although mine is about 4 feet above the tribander.
>
> Best to model it.
>
>
>
> Thanks
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|