TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] NEC, ground, grounds, and radials.

To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] NEC, ground, grounds, and radials.
From: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Reply-to: geraldj@weather.net, Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 14:13:33 -0600
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
What I see is that the changes in isotropic reference definition in the presence of a ground cause the program to show greater gain numbers that make the casual user conclude that there is a gain caused by the presence of the earth that is not there when signal strength in the main lobe is measured compared to that antenna in free space.

73, Jerry, K0CQ

On 1/8/2011 6:48 AM, Steve Hunt wrote:
Jerry,

I can understand that the interpretation of dBi which appears in most
engineering texts (and possibly the IEEE definition?) throws up
conundrums with which you are uncomfortable. But what I think is unfair
is to claim that EZNEC is in error, simply because it adopts the
"industry standard" interpretation rather than an alternative that you
might prefer.

I make widespread use of EZNEC, and when I saw someone as authoritative
as yourself state that it is 3dB in error I felt it needed further
investigation!

73,
Steve G3TXQ

On 08/01/2011 00:20, Dr. Gerald N. Johnson wrote:
My conundrum is that I expect equal power intensity at the the measuring
point from the isotropic source whether a ground plane is involved or
not and that I also expect equal intensity from a vertical dipole in
free space and a quarter wave vertical on the ground plane (except for
the ground absorption at the real ground plane).

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>