QUOTE="Shockwave, post: 497850, member: 10882"]To Marconi: Remember you're basing this entirely off a model that doesn't even predict the phase of the antenna correctly. Expecting accurate results under these conditions is ridiculous. You're also contradicting the free space CST model where height makes no difference and the fact a 1/4 wavelength makes no difference at the frequencies and heights I work with but yet we still get at least 2dbd when side mounted in the same location as the dipole was. Please reserve opinion for when you can support it or when it doesn't contradict what has already been proven in the field.
Donald you are right, but I have attempted to explain what I think about this anomaly with Eznec and the why and what Roy may have done in designing this software.
IMO, the crux of this issue has to do with the way that NEC2 handles the connections for the wires, and what Roy did about that to make modeling easier to use. But no body has listened to what I suggest in this regard...so it is worth repeating.
In many cases I can make a model show the corrects current phasing, and I've shown you how that works with a simple dipole, but you have to be disregarding the warnings about currents that Roy told us about in his manual.
I have found that if I make a S4 with just 3 radials I can fix the models currents to look right in my minds eye.
If I do the Vector with 4 radials, however, I can only fix two wire ends that connect as NEC2 demands, so the current work right. This leaves two important long radial wire connected wire 1 end 2 to wire 2 end 2 and NEC2 does not like that. You just ignore the warning from Roy that I posted a while back to Bob.
I'm thinking that Mr. Cebik possibly never messed with this particular CB antenna before, but when Bob described the S4 and its construction...maybe Cebik realized that Eznec would have difficulty in addressing the taper, and the angles created by two tangent wires that are close together. This is just a guess on my part, but IMO this antenna model can be done using Eznec, and I'm convinced I've done it.
I've tried talking to Henry and DB to see if they could help me prove this possible with Eznec currents. I even used a simple horizontal dipole to show you how this works...but no body is buying the idea. Maybe this is also why Roy felt a stronger need to make Eznec user friendly, rather than worry about what it did with proper wire end connections and the tabular currents log. I can't even find anything that Cebik wrote on the subject of how Eznec handles currents.
I think I even posted this simple dipole idea sometime back right here on WWDX, but nobody was even interested.
If you had paid attention to the examples of the dipole I sent you before, I think you would have seen whether the currents were properly indicated or not...the performance factors for the antenna would be the same...either way.
[/QUOTE]
