-
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.
Hey fellas I have a question
- Thread starter Mr Clean
- Start date
All specs I have seen for the same antenna mounted either V or H show that the F/S ratio is only slightly worse for a verticle config.The beamwidth is slightly narrower for a H config.These values were not something you would really see in the real world but were measurable only using lab grade field strength gear.For all practical purposes there is no differance.
W5LZ said:
That might be true, but could the shape of the radiation pattern be affected by the polarization of the antenna?
What I mean is that a horizontally polarized (oriented?) dipole would have a figure 8 radiation pattern and a vertically polarized (oriented?) dipole would have a circular (omni?) radiation pattern.
C2 said:
While that may be true for a single element the original question was asked about beam antennas.AFAIK the single element is the only case where that may be true.
Toll_Free
Well-Known Member
C2 said:
In free space, no.
In the real world, things like your mast / tower, guy wires and the like come in to play.
--Toll_Free
What happened to freecell's post?
And what do you mean "no?"
I'm assuming you mean that the pattern is roughly a teardrop shape, fully symetrical in both dimentions, in free space?
of course the feedline, mast, and relative position of ants on the ground have an impact on your radiation pattern. That is nothing more than a statement of facts.
And what do you mean "no?"
I'm assuming you mean that the pattern is roughly a teardrop shape, fully symetrical in both dimentions, in free space?
of course the feedline, mast, and relative position of ants on the ground have an impact on your radiation pattern. That is nothing more than a statement of facts.
C2,
In free space a dipole's radiation pattern is roughly the shape of two round baloons touching at one point. No 'tear drop' pattern. In real world patterns, the shape depends on the antennas environment, primarily it's height above ground. If you can imagine taking those two touching baloons and pressing them against a flat surface, that pushing force being applied only at the contact point which is the antenna, you get the rough equivalent radiation pattern, sort of (and boy, is that a ~rough~ example!
). Just for the 'heck' of it, see if you can find one of the free examples of "EZNEC" and play around with height. Really some big changes possible with just a few feet difference (few dozen feet in most cases, depending on frequency). Don't take it as 'gospel' though, unless you wanna spend months entering environmetal data to make the thing really show you what's happening (not me, too @#$ lazy!).
- 'Doc
In free space a dipole's radiation pattern is roughly the shape of two round baloons touching at one point. No 'tear drop' pattern. In real world patterns, the shape depends on the antennas environment, primarily it's height above ground. If you can imagine taking those two touching baloons and pressing them against a flat surface, that pushing force being applied only at the contact point which is the antenna, you get the rough equivalent radiation pattern, sort of (and boy, is that a ~rough~ example!
). Just for the 'heck' of it, see if you can find one of the free examples of "EZNEC" and play around with height. Really some big changes possible with just a few feet difference (few dozen feet in most cases, depending on frequency). Don't take it as 'gospel' though, unless you wanna spend months entering environmetal data to make the thing really show you what's happening (not me, too @#$ lazy!). - 'Doc