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

I noticed that. While the most recent crop of models I've used use such a high angle not all of the models of the vector I've played with have been that way. I've had some that use a one segment long horizontal before the upward angled radials. I'll likely stick with that design in the future as it more accurately follows the actual antenna. I got around the segment warnings from that sharp angle by using a very thin wire. .0001 millimeter in diameter for the modeling. I know it isn't realistic, but even .1 milllimeter wire was giving me issues. Using a horizontal segment between the upward pointing radial and the base of the antenna I think will resolve that.

Ahh so it is there. I'm used to just clicking right through that screen. When I get a chance to run the software again I'll take a look.

Most everything I've found with playing with this antenna in 4nec2 has been posted in this thread.

I do not claim to be qualified enough to answer this...

---
I have downloaded the free an-soft100 modeling program. They use a modified version of nec2 for their engine (or so they claim) that resolves some things, such as the acute angle issue you mentioned above. I have yet to be able to get working identical models to function as expected in both software programs. When I get some time I'll have to look at them some more, and perhaps post up some differences. From what I can tell the an-soft100 software seems to consistently have a slightly higher gain figure than the 4nec2 software so far, but that is definately not a scientific test as of yet as the only models I put through it thus far are vector models. I have also not yet figured out how the three variable earth system matches up with 4nec2's two variable system to make equivalents... This will require more playing...

Hmm the tabbed values in my last post showed as tabbed in the preview, but in the actual post the tab information seems to have been lost... I'll have to remember to use code tags for that information in the future...

The DB

<blockquote data-quote="The DB" data-source="post: 452011" data-attributes="member: 21346">I noticed that.&nbsp; While the most recent crop of models I&#039;ve used use such a high angle not all of the models of the vector I&#039;ve played with have been that way.&nbsp; I&#039;ve had some that use a one segment long horizontal before the upward angled radials.&nbsp; I&#039;ll likely stick with that design in the future as it more accurately follows the actual antenna.&nbsp; I got around the segment warnings from that sharp angle by using a very thin wire.&nbsp; .0001 millimeter in diameter for the modeling.&nbsp; I know it isn&#039;t realistic, but even .1 milllimeter wire was giving me issues.&nbsp; Using a horizontal segment between the upward pointing radial and the base of the antenna I think will resolve that.Ahh so it is there.&nbsp; I&#039;m used to just clicking right through that screen.&nbsp; When I get a chance to run the software again I&#039;ll take a look.Most everything I&#039;ve found with playing with this antenna in 4nec2 has been posted in this thread.I do not claim to be qualified enough to answer this...---I have downloaded the free an-soft100 modeling program.&nbsp; They use a modified version of nec2 for their engine (or so they claim) that resolves some things, such as the acute angle issue you mentioned above.&nbsp; I have yet to be able to get working identical models to function as expected in both software programs.&nbsp; When I get some time I&#039;ll have to look at them some more, and perhaps post up some differences.&nbsp; From what I can tell the an-soft100 software seems to consistently have a slightly higher gain figure than the 4nec2 software so far, but that is definately not a scientific test as of yet as the only models I put through it thus far are vector models.&nbsp; I have also not yet figured out how the three variable earth system matches up with 4nec2&#039;s two variable system to make equivalents...&nbsp; This will require more playing...Hmm the tabbed values in my last post showed as tabbed in the preview, but in the actual post the tab information seems to have been lost... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :("&nbsp; data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />&nbsp; I&#039;ll have to remember to use code tags for that information in the future...<a href="http://hittman.us" target="_blank">The DB</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="The DB, post: 452011, member: 21346"] I noticed that. While the most recent crop of models I've used use such a high angle not all of the models of the vector I've played with have been that way. I've had some that use a one segment long horizontal before the upward angled radials. I'll likely stick with that design in the future as it more accurately follows the actual antenna. I got around the segment warnings from that sharp angle by using a very thin wire. .0001 millimeter in diameter for the modeling. I know it isn't realistic, but even .1 milllimeter wire was giving me issues. Using a horizontal segment between the upward pointing radial and the base of the antenna I think will resolve that. Ahh so it is there. I'm used to just clicking right through that screen. When I get a chance to run the software again I'll take a look. Most everything I've found with playing with this antenna in 4nec2 has been posted in this thread. I do not claim to be qualified enough to answer this... --- I have downloaded the free an-soft100 modeling program. They use a modified version of nec2 for their engine (or so they claim) that resolves some things, such as the acute angle issue you mentioned above. I have yet to be able to get working identical models to function as expected in both software programs. When I get some time I'll have to look at them some more, and perhaps post up some differences. From what I can tell the an-soft100 software seems to consistently have a slightly higher gain figure than the 4nec2 software so far, but that is definately not a scientific test as of yet as the only models I put through it thus far are vector models. I have also not yet figured out how the three variable earth system matches up with 4nec2's two variable system to make equivalents... This will require more playing... Hmm the tabbed values in my last post showed as tabbed in the preview, but in the actual post the tab information seems to have been lost... :( I'll have to remember to use code tags for that information in the future... [URL="http://hittman.us"][COLOR="Black"]The DB[/COLOR][/URL] [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom