You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

Now that you put this thread back in front of me, I started wondering why we are getting a vertical component from the super sinner antenna models. Even the test model I made early on, which was made up of 100% horizontal wires, shows a definite vertical component. As of yet, no one has posted a plausible reason as to why this is happening, at least as far as I can tell.

Can anyone explain why this is happening? Or even have any ideas? Any tests I should model?

One thought on my end was that the modeling software is in error. That being said, I have yet to see any evidence on this either way. To try and confirm this I will use another modeling program based on another engine, in this case Mmana-Gal, which is based on the mininec engine. The thing is, the mininec engine has its faults. It does a few things better than the nec2 engine, such as calculating a wire with taper, but anything outside of that very small list we have to assume that the nec2 engine is more accurate. This is clearly one of those cases that, if there is a difference, we will have to favor the nec2 results. Therefore, while this should still be done, I feel it may end up being inconclusive.

The next thought is, is the earth is playing a part? At least in the models I have made, in all cases so far this antenna is being modeled at less than 1/4 wavelength above the earth. I don't think this will actually be the cause, but it is something to look in to. This will be simple enough to test by modeling the antenna is free-space.

The next thought is it has something to do with the antenna's layout. I wonder what the model will look like if I point the part of the antenna after the bend straight up instead of it being horizontal? That will give the antenna vertical elements, so how will that model look compared with the same elements being horizontal?

The next thought of the antenna's layout is what if one of the bent elements is reversed to point the other direction? Will this have any effect on the vertical polarized radiation?

This is where I am at so far. Does anyone else have any thoughts on tests I should run with the modeling software?

The DB

<blockquote data-quote="The DB" data-source="post: 777712" data-attributes="member: 21346">Now that you put this thread back in front of me, I started wondering why we are getting a vertical component from the super sinner antenna models.&nbsp; Even the test model I made early on, which was made up of 100% horizontal wires, shows a definite vertical component.&nbsp; As of yet, no one has posted a plausible reason as to why this is happening, at least as far as I can tell.Can anyone explain why this is happening?&nbsp; Or even have any ideas?&nbsp; Any tests I should model?One thought on my end was that the modeling software is in error.&nbsp; That being said, I have yet to see any evidence on this either way.&nbsp; To try and confirm this I will use&nbsp; another modeling program based on another engine, in this case Mmana-Gal, which is based on the mininec engine.&nbsp; The thing is, the mininec engine has its faults.&nbsp; It does a few things better than the nec2 engine, such as calculating a wire with taper, but anything outside of that very small list we have to assume that the nec2 engine is more accurate.&nbsp; This is clearly one of those cases that, if there is a difference, we will have to favor the nec2 results.&nbsp; Therefore, while this should still be done, I feel it may end up being inconclusive.The next thought is, is the earth is playing a part?&nbsp; At least in the models I have made, in all cases so far this antenna is being modeled at less than 1/4 wavelength above the earth.&nbsp; I don&#039;t think this will actually be the cause, but it is something to look in to.&nbsp; This will be simple enough to test by modeling the antenna is free-space.The next thought is it has something to do with the antenna&#039;s layout.&nbsp; I wonder what the model will look like if I point the part of the antenna after the bend straight up instead of it being horizontal?&nbsp; That will give the antenna vertical elements, so how will that model look compared with the same elements being horizontal?The next thought of the antenna&#039;s layout is what if one of the bent elements is reversed to point the other direction?&nbsp; Will this have any effect on the vertical polarized radiation?This is where I am at so far.&nbsp; Does anyone else have any thoughts on tests I should run with the modeling software?The DB</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The DB, post: 777712, member: 21346"] Now that you put this thread back in front of me, I started wondering why we are getting a vertical component from the super sinner antenna models. Even the test model I made early on, which was made up of 100% horizontal wires, shows a definite vertical component. As of yet, no one has posted a plausible reason as to why this is happening, at least as far as I can tell. Can anyone explain why this is happening? Or even have any ideas? Any tests I should model? One thought on my end was that the modeling software is in error. That being said, I have yet to see any evidence on this either way. To try and confirm this I will use another modeling program based on another engine, in this case Mmana-Gal, which is based on the mininec engine. The thing is, the mininec engine has its faults. It does a few things better than the nec2 engine, such as calculating a wire with taper, but anything outside of that very small list we have to assume that the nec2 engine is more accurate. This is clearly one of those cases that, if there is a difference, we will have to favor the nec2 results. Therefore, while this should still be done, I feel it may end up being inconclusive. The next thought is, is the earth is playing a part? At least in the models I have made, in all cases so far this antenna is being modeled at less than 1/4 wavelength above the earth. I don't think this will actually be the cause, but it is something to look in to. This will be simple enough to test by modeling the antenna is free-space. The next thought is it has something to do with the antenna's layout. I wonder what the model will look like if I point the part of the antenna after the bend straight up instead of it being horizontal? That will give the antenna vertical elements, so how will that model look compared with the same elements being horizontal? The next thought of the antenna's layout is what if one of the bent elements is reversed to point the other direction? Will this have any effect on the vertical polarized radiation? This is where I am at so far. Does anyone else have any thoughts on tests I should run with the modeling software? The DB [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom