Marconi compares Eznec to AnSOF

[Marconi]

Here is ansof's version of the center fed 1/2 wave dipole in Free Space model showing 2.138 dbi gain vs. Eznec with a similar antenna model showing 2.14 dbi gain.



Here is the Eznec model in Free Space showing 2.14 dbi gain.



Henry, I figure if this dipole model produces the same gain with both Ansof and Eznec...then there is very likely little difference with more complex models.

If I can figure out how to report the matching characteristics for the Ansof, I will post them in comparison too. However I can tell you the impedances shows to be almost identical.

I would expect that DB could produce similar results as well using 4Nec2.

Maybe Ansof can handle taper and wire on/in the ground, and that could make some difference in some accurate modeling, but I think your Eznec Pro4 can do that too.

Also if you guys are snowed by the bright colors Ansof makes...that's alright with me.

How say you?

 

[The DB]

I would expect that DB could produce similar results as well using 4Nec2.

I played with the trial version of that software once upon a time, back when I knew much less about modeling. It produced results that were very close to 4Nec2's. One odd thing is I am finding much less about it now than I did then.

There was a rundown on the differences between Nec2 and cNec that I can't find anymore. I do know that they did fix some of the known problems with Nec2, or so they claimed.


The DB

 

[Marconi]

There was a rundown on the differences between Nec2 and cNec that I can't find anymore. I do know that they did fix some of the known problems with Nec2, or so they claimed.

I checked Ansof out some time back and found an article noted to recount the history of NEC by the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories bunch and the US Navy Department, who I think paid for the development. The article spoke about numerous versions developed for different computer platforms over the years and some recent PC development as well.

I recall the code, NEC engine, available in the public domain was also being developed to accommodate various modern personal computer platforms. The article suggested that different NEC versions were available at different price ranges, sorted out by complexity and function.

If true, I guess that might explain the different products that Roy Lewallen has available for sale.

So, maybe there has been some recent development for the cMoM ideas that AnSof claims they use, but I still think it is NEC2 or NEC4.

I can't find anything else either, but according to my model above...I don't see enough difference that would get me excited to use AnSof, not for CB antennas for sure.

Thus far I don't understand how one modifies one of AnSof's models. The video tutor, show nothing along the lines of how one backs up due to mistakes in process and I don't think there is a manual. Of course I think that Eznec is much more user-friendly.

I want to do a model of my Marconi design using AnSof, but that won't happen until after I figure out how to back up and modify this pretty stilted new software for me.

 

[Henry HPSD]

Henry, I figure if this dipole model produces the same gain with both Ansof and Eznec...then there is very likely little difference with more complex models.

It is the opposite Marconi,
To calculate the gain of a dipole is relative simple.
Heck, you could do that with a piece of pen and paper
Differences in calculations become more apparent in line with the complexity of the system.

ANSOF uses cMoM EZnec etc uses MoM
Both are based on the "Methode of Moment".

In order to understand the difference,
You have to think in lines of .....what is it that Eznec has issues with ?
Sharp corners,..tapered elements, close parallel lines, circles, the type of the element for instances... flat bar elements etc.
That is where the point of interest is..

Kind regards,

H>

 

[Marconi]

Thanks Henry. I know you're right, but this world has many more designs an objects to consider for designing and I won't ever be a part of that. I leave this to guys like you and The DB, and a few others maybe.

This old man is only interested in simply modeling of CB type antennas at the moment.

Sometime I wonder what good my models do here in the antenna section of WWDX. It is mostly just DB and I, and sometimes you maybe. A few others have posted about their modeling, but they are long gone.

My only point in my simple dipole demonstration was to try and justify what I see as very little differences in models...reported out from these software programs we have discussed.

IMO, Eznec output shows us the very basic information and graphics that maybe some of us regular folks have come to understand a little. It is not fancy and full of technical details, and it does not have colors, but it works for me and I have not really found a CB antenna design I can make a good hit at doing either, right or wrong.

I sure don't think I need to be more complicated in my efforts. As a matter of fact, I try to be less complicated and that suits my own limitations. I do this, even at the cost of the seeming, micro bits of data difference that more complicated antenna modeling might show us to be the ultimate in accuracy.

I find Eznec very intuitive by design and I thank Roy Lewallen for that. I learned what I know about modeling on my own with little help, and I sometimes try to duplicate what others report that is said to be more accurate.

Henry, a while back I asked Bob85 about an idea he told me about back when your Sigma4 paper was first published. He said you two had plans to do some work on the Big Mack collinear that you bought sometime back.

Do you remember me asking your for your detailed BM dimensions back then?

He further mentioned that you had, on your Website, your new design idea for a collinear monopole for HF. Right away I went and looked and I saw a picture of your idea mounted in a field as I recall, but there were no details except for a name that escapes my memory at the moment. I don't believe I've talked to Bob about this since.

Have you possibly used AnSof or Eznec 4Pro to design this new stacked collinear monopole idea you have?

If so, why not post something about this antenna?

For a long time I've had an interest in the Eznec model for the BM. In fact I even made my own vain attempt to model it.

Since Big Hairs idea for his collinear on his Internet Website has been so soundly discounted a foolhardy, I'm still curious about a good workable collinear monopole idea for 11 meters. hehe

Here is the thread where I posted: Marconi's Eznec 5 model of the Big Mack.

BTW Henry, I requested your comments on some stuff above...maybe if you get time you could try and respond a little more.

How say you?

 

[Henry HPSD]

Hi Marconi !

Agreed in aspect to EZNEC.
EZNEC is indeed a fine tool.
I use it "most" compared to others.
It can indeed do almost anything, and if not:
In most circumstances, there are ways to "deal" with it.

Tend to think:
It has an "easy learning curve" compared to others.
...besides...most people use it...and knowledge about it, is well shared.
The author is a great guy earned by his great reputation.
So no debate there...lol...
And that ends this "advertisement" from my side (hihi)


In aspect to the second part of your post...
Well, here comes the less happy part (lol).

Often I tried and hoped to helped others to provide answers for those whom are honest interested in trying to find out "why".helping to stop the "rubbish".

And by far I don’t know all, I’m learning...just a normal guy...willing to get "best" out of it.
Willing to except mistakes, willing to learn.

Though not so long ago I have seen good guys.
...guys who were willing to help others...
Sadly due to "truth" i have seen them "leaving" (?)
Just because they were not able to say:

"You know what...: i was wrong..you were right".. Thanks! shall we go on..Next subject"

And I consider that a loss, as 9 out of 10 times if they spoke they made sense..they were correct, and they were helping many !

So tell, me: they were wrong, but they helped so many...
Im thinking:
Perhaps its better to leave them wrong, so the majority can bennefit of them when they are right.
If been a SGT with Recon, and i would not hesitate to "give" myself, and i know ...my guys would think the same in order to save "others".
So, Why would i force myself in debates to proof one wrong while that one could do so many things good.....besides....
It is allready beyond primairy cb stuff.

Everywhere, if seen manufacturers "lying / cheating"...heck i can still point fingers to some "small players" active in this forum if needed.

If seen "world antenna market players" behaving bad... really bad...
And those are guys with a reputation, guys who you would not expect.
They are like:
"Correct, but you are not allowed to say that ...and this is private info"
"Great, thanks for point out !...changing things...but making it worse on other aspects.
They lie on purpose to those not knowing, they use information to camouflage.
And me beeing ADHD high...I honestly cant stand that.

If had those "world players “contacted me in private and say:
Well if you dont believe me just ask the Chief Editor of the ARRL...
(it was a situation where he was the `key`)
So i did...Guess what?

If seen "new kids" (antenna manufacturer) ...for which i honestly was happy... hoping they were "good" and they were... I really would have helped them...only to find out:
Time "kills" that attitude and commercial benefit becomes the primary thing...again...

If seen info by good willing guys is provided and it just gets copied one on one...
I mean really ONE ON ONE... and its "oke" .....

I’m sounding like my mother in the past loll...
I’m not mad, I’m disappointed lol.


Eddie,
Sure i could post it here ....but why?....
You ask yourself why you spend the effort, that same question is real for me.
For who is it beneficial?
I’m still hoping and i still help anyone but sometimes.... sometimes I’m just afraid I think.

If seen quite a bit perhaps for my personal level ...to much....
And im afraid i dont fit "in between".
I’m not trying to be "closed", but I’m having difficulties to continue to be open.
As i see:
Honesty is only valued by few, though copied by many.
It is not a matter of "helping' it is a situation of how others try to defend.
Because every now and then i noticed people do not like the truth and they won’t say "thank you"....They "copy"...and get away with it.

And that "kills" my attitude...and i don’t want that, i want to have faith..and help.

For that reason it is better to make sure i just help and don’t go into "new" things.
The thing is...the difference between stealing and using an idea is:
To tell where the origin of the idea lies..

That’s it... no more no less...

I’m done with seeing antennas copied so someone somewhere has commercial bennefit of it.


Take for example this one:




Its size is just 1.7m in square...

But:

It has NO matching,
The gain equals a dipole (2,14 dBI)
It is omnidirectional,
power handling is almost limited...
It can be in a "yagi" configuration providing additional gain etc.


I’m confident some: Either on a car: in a shoot-out or something
Or in a flat...maybe in a portable set-up. Or simply as i use it:
"As an Omni propagation spotter" ...I’m confident it has and some will see its potential.
Oke...and then.....:

All hard work is done, and not only by me (cause Brian Cake needs a hugh amount of credit hihi)

And then...I could provide all....only to find out another antenna company copies all?
to find out another guru tries to explain what is said on other forums?
To find out good guys..good guys...can’t handle they were wrong and stop?


Honest Eddie...
To ask those questions....you did...yes it could help you....but who else ?

And while that isn’t a bad thing (helping you), the majority isn’t interested and im not willing to push that needle towards the negative side.

I’m really not irritated; I’m just not willing to help those who gain profit in a wrong way.
So...
Please ask questions about others, about situations we all have....about things that need to be put "straigth"..and if i can...and am allowed i will be happy to join the discussion.

Hope my personal thought can be valued.....doing my best....:--)))
Hoping you can understand why im caution about providing details....

For now: enjoy the weekend !
Cu Soon !

 

[Singularity35]

Huh?

 

[Marconi]

35, Henry's post is not hard, he is saying NO!

I guess I'll just keep on guessing. Up to now using my own ideas seems to have worked for many of these modeling ideas.

Here is the link to my old thread showing my Big Mack model compared to the New Vector 4K.

The model is in the 1st post of this thread.
http://www.worldwidedx.com/threads/marconis-eznec-5-model-of-the-big-mack.142559/

 

[Singularity35]

Thanks for the translation Marconi.

 

[Marconi]

Thanks for the translation Marconi.

No problem 35. It don't hurt for the asker' to ask questions now and then...even if the askie' gets T'ed in the asking. They can't eat ya'...can they? he he

I took the whole post...as him being a bit condescending, but I agree...he has the right not to share.

 

[bob85]

I can't fault Henry for not sharing info on his highlader Eddie.

Sure it would be interesting for us to talk about.
A true co- linear without lossy coils or trombones.
no doubt if it works as good or better than the flimsy BIG-MAC It would be copied possibly taking Henrys own words for advertising purposes without saying where the idea came from

That's what happend to Donald with his .82wave.
He's not the only one making a vector style antenna using 1/4 wave radials with a claimed .82wave monopole and some mickeymouse gain claims.

 

[Marconi]

Your right Bob, but if we sit around on our ideas and dreams and do no work, present no ideas, and make nothing...then nothing is the result.

If you build a good brand, do things honestly, and with customers in mind, like Henry apparently did in the past, then the sky can be the limit even with competition.

This World is full of such success, but diligence is essential in the process. Unless he thinks I will steal his idea and promote it like it is mine...keeping secrets for secrets sake is a waste IMO.

For all I know about History...Tesla could have easily reacted about the same. I understand he was not well liked it seems. Maybe he had a lot more in the gamble, but we know how that turned out for him at least.

 

[Marconi]

I can't fault Henry for not sharing info on his highlader Eddie.

Well Bob, here is all we know about the highlander unless you have more information you are willing to share. You seem to know more than most.

I was only interested in the Big Mack dimensions, and only of late did I asked him for his dimensions for the highlander. Since he likely spent some time and effort to develop the idea, build the antenna in the image...and maybe even test the idea...you would think he would publish something like all the other antennas he shares on his Website.

I'm just curious, but you would think I'm some unscrupulous antenna builder that just wanted to steal an idea.

If my guessing at the dimensions for the Big Mack that I produced some time back was based solely on the spec sheet, that I think you posted earlier, and it is even close and showing a very healthy gain at a good low angle like you, Bob, have suggested to us the BM would perform...then IMO all a guy with good antenna design and understanding has to do to duplicate something similar to the highlander...is do it with a pencil, paper, and maybe a straight ruler or a compass might be helpful.

Personally I don't see any collinear stacking in his image, but what do I know. I do see Big Hairs efforts to stack his monster and phase it however. So, I this leaves me with an opinion here.

I'll just keep it a secret though. I don't what anybody to steal my idea.

A smart cookie probably don't absolutely need the actual dimensions. That said, Nobody here can disprove the model of the Big Mack that I posted earlier...without actually doing some work, BS aside.

Me thinks Donald complains too much. Then in his next words he tells us all his successes. Henry likely has an opinion on this topic I'm sure. At least he has talked about it already.

It's Old News Bob and nobody really cares.

I've been listening to CB BS for years. CB may have one foot in the ground, and struggling with the other, but the BS is still live and well.

 

[bob85]

Eddie.
Im sure Henry is not the slightest bit worried that YOU would build and market his Highlander.


Tesla was not well liked by the capitalist shithouses that run the world Eddie.
They used what they could make money from and ignored or coverd up what him and others had to say about what electricity is.

Electrons changed direction since i was at college but they still teach us that electricity is electrons flowing in a wire.

 

[Marconi]

Tesla was not well liked by the capitalist shithouses that run the world Eddie.
They used what they could make money from and ignored or coverd up what him and others had to say about what electricity is.

Yes Bob, that is my point exactly, so why keep our heads in the ground? Nothing is going to change and "no work" ever got anything done.

I'm sure there are lots of geniuses out there just like this conversation is describing. It wasn't me that got off into this hornets nest of words. I just asked for some dimensions and look where that has lead us.

I have no sympathy for any of this. We are all grown men and should be able to discuss things.

Bob, do you happen to still have your old Big Mack? If so, maybe you could give me some specific dimensions for the 2 coil areas, I can imagine the rest in my head.