Marconi,
Sounds reasonable to me. I'm not sure how you could do much better with the equipment you had available. 'Repeatability' and consistency in the results is a 'poor man's alternative. Not bad at all, but also not exactly worth a trip to the 'bank' in every case.
Cibek's test done at different heights and with two frequencies does provide some 'comparisons' that do show trends, of sorts. I would think that those 'trends' change in importance with the objective of the tests, or what you would be particularly interested in, such as the affect of changing radial angles, or 'take off' angles, input impedance matching, or what the color of the sky is at any particular time.
Aiming for a low take off angle isn't necessarily the 'best' idea for an antenna. Primarily because the 'best' take off angle changes with propagation, and what's good today may not be good tomorrow (or in ten minutes). And because the take off angle will change with different mounting environments (same antenna, different results in different locations).
It is interesting though, ain't it?
- 'Doc
Sounds reasonable to me. I'm not sure how you could do much better with the equipment you had available. 'Repeatability' and consistency in the results is a 'poor man's alternative. Not bad at all, but also not exactly worth a trip to the 'bank' in every case.
Cibek's test done at different heights and with two frequencies does provide some 'comparisons' that do show trends, of sorts. I would think that those 'trends' change in importance with the objective of the tests, or what you would be particularly interested in, such as the affect of changing radial angles, or 'take off' angles, input impedance matching, or what the color of the sky is at any particular time.
Aiming for a low take off angle isn't necessarily the 'best' idea for an antenna. Primarily because the 'best' take off angle changes with propagation, and what's good today may not be good tomorrow (or in ten minutes). And because the take off angle will change with different mounting environments (same antenna, different results in different locations).
It is interesting though, ain't it?
- 'Doc