Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Good evening, Gentlemen.
A thought experiment: Start with a regular 1/4-wave monopole ground plane. The literature says it looks like half the value of a dipole, about 35 Ohms, when resonant. It would be nice to have the resistance at the terminals be a bit higher, and I very much value a grounded element anyway, so let's let it evolve into a folded monopole. The literature says it should now have about 4 times the terminal resistance of the original 1/4-wave we started with (about 140 Ohms). Huh. Now it's a bit high. They tell me that shortening the antenna below resonance will lower the resistance and introduce capacitance. But I think I have also seen in the literature that the antenna can be viewed as a transmission line. A shorted portion of parallel conductor transmission line (the folded monopole) less than 1/4-wave long looks inductive. But wait! Which will win? Will the shortness of the antenna look capacitive or will the transmission line dominate and the antenna will look inductive? Even better, is there some choice of the folded section wire diameters and spacing that will give an inductance that will exactly offset the capacitance due to shortness? So, then, is there a folded monopole of such dimensions that the resistance is 50 Ohms (due to being shorter than 1/4 wave) with no terminal reactance (due to the inductive design of the "transmission line" cancelled by the shortness of the antenna's capacitance)? Brain hurts. John, KD5YI |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The other John Smith wrote:
Even better, is there some choice of the folded section wire diameters and spacing that will give an inductance that will exactly offset the capacitance due to shortness? Unfortunately, a folded monopole goes the opposite direction to a monopole, impedance-wise. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The short answer to your question is no, with practical impedances. It
turns out you'd need a very low impedance transmission line (on the order of a few ohms, if I recall correctly) to track very well. The easiest way to analyze a folded dipole is as two separate circuits, common-mode (or "antenna") and differential-mode (or "transmission line"). Superposition applies, so the two can be analyzed separately. First consider the "antenna". Its contribution to the feedpoint impedance is the same as a conventional monopole made from the two wires in parallel, but multiplied by 4 due to the transforming action of the "folding" process. (Other ratios are possible -- 4 is what you get if the conductors are the same diameter.) This "antenna" does all the radiating. In parallel with the "antenna" at the feedpoint is the "transmission line". This is the short-circuited transmission line made from the two conductors, with transmission line velocity factor taken into account. The "transmission line" part does no radiating. Now, if you shorten the antenna, two things will happen. The reactance of the "antenna" will become more negative, and its resistance will drop some. This will show up at the feedpoint just like it would for an unfolded monopole, but multiplied by 4. But you're also shortening the transmission line, whose impedance also appears at the feedpoint, in parallel with the transformed "antenna's". Assuming negligible loss in the feedline, this will cause a change only in parallel reactance at the feedpoint. Because of the relatively high impedance of the transmission line, and the relative sharpness of the impedance change of the "antenna" compared to the transmission line, there's very little compensation in the case of most practical antennas. Remember that the two impedances are in parallel, not series, so the high Z contribution of the transmission line has little overall effect. As I recall from doing an analysis some time ago, you get more broadening compared to a conventional monopole from having a fatter equivalent "antenna" conductor than you do from the transmission line stub. The reactance of the "antenna" can be a bit tricky to calculate accurately, but a number of modern programs (such as the free EZNEC demo) do a good job of it. The transmission line part of the effect is easy, either with a scientific calculator or one of the transmission line programs which are readily available. So overall, it's not difficult to find the actual impedances you'll see in practice. Roy Lewallen, W7EL The other John Smith wrote: Good evening, Gentlemen. A thought experiment: Start with a regular 1/4-wave monopole ground plane. The literature says it looks like half the value of a dipole, about 35 Ohms, when resonant. It would be nice to have the resistance at the terminals be a bit higher, and I very much value a grounded element anyway, so let's let it evolve into a folded monopole. The literature says it should now have about 4 times the terminal resistance of the original 1/4-wave we started with (about 140 Ohms). Huh. Now it's a bit high. They tell me that shortening the antenna below resonance will lower the resistance and introduce capacitance. But I think I have also seen in the literature that the antenna can be viewed as a transmission line. A shorted portion of parallel conductor transmission line (the folded monopole) less than 1/4-wave long looks inductive. But wait! Which will win? Will the shortness of the antenna look capacitive or will the transmission line dominate and the antenna will look inductive? Even better, is there some choice of the folded section wire diameters and spacing that will give an inductance that will exactly offset the capacitance due to shortness? So, then, is there a folded monopole of such dimensions that the resistance is 50 Ohms (due to being shorter than 1/4 wave) with no terminal reactance (due to the inductive design of the "transmission line" cancelled by the shortness of the antenna's capacitance)? Brain hurts. John, KD5YI |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
John:
Andrew Corp. made a good living back in the dark ages (40s-60s) manufacturing and selling 50 ohm folded monopoles. I can go measure the element diameters on mine if you are interested. If I can recall where it is stored. It uses a small inductance at the feed point for matching. -- Crazy George Remove N O and S P A M imbedded in return address "The other John Smith" wrote in message nk.net... Good evening, Gentlemen. A thought experiment: Start with a regular 1/4-wave monopole ground plane. The literature says it looks like half the value of a dipole, about 35 Ohms, when resonant. It would be nice to have the resistance at the terminals be a bit higher, and I very much value a grounded element anyway, so let's let it evolve into a folded monopole. The literature says it should now have about 4 times the terminal resistance of the original 1/4-wave we started with (about 140 Ohms). Huh. Now it's a bit high. They tell me that shortening the antenna below resonance will lower the resistance and introduce capacitance. But I think I have also seen in the literature that the antenna can be viewed as a transmission line. A shorted portion of parallel conductor transmission line (the folded monopole) less than 1/4-wave long looks inductive. But wait! Which will win? Will the shortness of the antenna look capacitive or will the transmission line dominate and the antenna will look inductive? Even better, is there some choice of the folded section wire diameters and spacing that will give an inductance that will exactly offset the capacitance due to shortness? So, then, is there a folded monopole of such dimensions that the resistance is 50 Ohms (due to being shorter than 1/4 wave) with no terminal reactance (due to the inductive design of the "transmission line" cancelled by the shortness of the antenna's capacitance)? Brain hurts. John, KD5YI |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Crazy George" wrote in message ... John: Andrew Corp. made a good living back in the dark ages (40s-60s) manufacturing and selling 50 ohm folded monopoles. I can go measure the element diameters on mine if you are interested. If I can recall where it is stored. It uses a small inductance at the feed point for matching. -- Crazy George Thanks, George, but the inductor at the feed point is disqualified. The idea was to learn if everything could be done by just clever design. It appears not. But, thanks for your offer. John |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Okay. Thanks, Roy. This is getting too difficult for me so I'll go back to
something more traditional. John "Roy Lewallen" wrote in message ... The short answer to your question is no, with practical impedances. It turns out you'd need a very low impedance transmission line (on the order of a few ohms, if I recall correctly) to track very well. The easiest way to analyze a folded dipole is as two separate circuits, common-mode (or "antenna") and differential-mode (or "transmission line"). Superposition applies, so the two can be analyzed separately. First consider the "antenna". Its contribution to the feedpoint impedance is the same as a conventional monopole made from the two wires in parallel, but multiplied by 4 due to the transforming action of the "folding" process. (Other ratios are possible -- 4 is what you get if the conductors are the same diameter.) This "antenna" does all the radiating. In parallel with the "antenna" at the feedpoint is the "transmission line". This is the short-circuited transmission line made from the two conductors, with transmission line velocity factor taken into account. The "transmission line" part does no radiating. Now, if you shorten the antenna, two things will happen. The reactance of the "antenna" will become more negative, and its resistance will drop some. This will show up at the feedpoint just like it would for an unfolded monopole, but multiplied by 4. But you're also shortening the transmission line, whose impedance also appears at the feedpoint, in parallel with the transformed "antenna's". Assuming negligible loss in the feedline, this will cause a change only in parallel reactance at the feedpoint. Because of the relatively high impedance of the transmission line, and the relative sharpness of the impedance change of the "antenna" compared to the transmission line, there's very little compensation in the case of most practical antennas. Remember that the two impedances are in parallel, not series, so the high Z contribution of the transmission line has little overall effect. As I recall from doing an analysis some time ago, you get more broadening compared to a conventional monopole from having a fatter equivalent "antenna" conductor than you do from the transmission line stub. The reactance of the "antenna" can be a bit tricky to calculate accurately, but a number of modern programs (such as the free EZNEC demo) do a good job of it. The transmission line part of the effect is easy, either with a scientific calculator or one of the transmission line programs which are readily available. So overall, it's not difficult to find the actual impedances you'll see in practice. Roy Lewallen, W7EL The other John Smith wrote: Good evening, Gentlemen. A thought experiment: Start with a regular 1/4-wave monopole ground plane. The literature says it looks like half the value of a dipole, about 35 Ohms, when resonant. It would be nice to have the resistance at the terminals be a bit higher, and I very much value a grounded element anyway, so let's let it evolve into a folded monopole. The literature says it should now have about 4 times the terminal resistance of the original 1/4-wave we started with (about 140 Ohms). Huh. Now it's a bit high. They tell me that shortening the antenna below resonance will lower the resistance and introduce capacitance. But I think I have also seen in the literature that the antenna can be viewed as a transmission line. A shorted portion of parallel conductor transmission line (the folded monopole) less than 1/4-wave long looks inductive. But wait! Which will win? Will the shortness of the antenna look capacitive or will the transmission line dominate and the antenna will look inductive? Even better, is there some choice of the folded section wire diameters and spacing that will give an inductance that will exactly offset the capacitance due to shortness? So, then, is there a folded monopole of such dimensions that the resistance is 50 Ohms (due to being shorter than 1/4 wave) with no terminal reactance (due to the inductive design of the "transmission line" cancelled by the shortness of the antenna's capacitance)? Brain hurts. John, KD5YI |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Crazy George wrote:
"Andrew Corp. made a good living back in the dark ages (40-60s) manufacturing and selling 50 ohm folded monopoles." They could be had in stainless steel and they were tough. Like Andrew cables and connectors, it was wrong to use anyything else. I can attest, having used countless numbers of the above, that Andrew`s folded monopole when ordered for the precise frequency and mounted atop your tower gave a full forward power indication on your wattmeter with nearly zero indicated reflected power which meant a good 50-ohm match. All you had to do was install the antenna right and it would give optimum performance for many years. Your signal reached as far as the eye could see and then some. Your radio heard signals acutely. Well grounded to the tower at the top and with proper grounding of the tower and transmission line at tower top and bottom, lightning is routed to ground and not to the inside of the attached radio. The antenna just shook off the lightning strikes with small pits as calling cards. No harm done. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "The other John Smith" wrote in message nk.net... "Crazy George" wrote in message ... John: Andrew Corp. made a good living back in the dark ages (40s-60s) manufacturing and selling 50 ohm folded monopoles. I can go measure the element diameters on mine if you are interested. If I can recall where it is stored. It uses a small inductance at the feed point for matching. -- Crazy George Thanks, George, but the inductor at the feed point is disqualified. The idea was to learn if everything could be done by just clever design. It appears not. But, thanks for your offer. John At the higher frequencies, one way to make a 50 Ohm antenna is to arrange it as a full wave loop, but make it about twice as high as wide. That is, you end up with an antenna that is 1/3 wavelength high, and 1/6 wavelength wide. It's a balanced antenna, so you don't need ground, but the whole thing has to be well up in the air. Tam/WB2TT |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Tam/WB2TT" wrote in message ... At the higher frequencies, one way to make a 50 Ohm antenna is to arrange it as a full wave loop, but make it about twice as high as wide. That is, you end up with an antenna that is 1/3 wavelength high, and 1/6 wavelength wide. It's a balanced antenna, so you don't need ground, but the whole thing has to be well up in the air. Tam/WB2TT That's an interesting one I'll remember. However, the idea is to make an unbalanced antenna with all the elements connected to ground. The folded monopole is an excellent example. Thanks. John |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() John Since I'm a poor reader, I'm not confidant I fully understand your objective. But, a folded monopole (1/4 wave) with a very fat "fed" element and a very thin "grounded" element, with very close spacing will have an input impedance lower that 150 ohms at *resonance*. It occurrs to me that you already know that. Jerry. "The other John Smith" wrote in message nk.net... Good evening, Gentlemen. A thought experiment: Start with a regular 1/4-wave monopole ground plane. The literature says it looks like half the value of a dipole, about 35 Ohms, when resonant. It would be nice to have the resistance at the terminals be a bit higher, and I very much value a grounded element anyway, so let's let it evolve into a folded monopole. The literature says it should now have about 4 times the terminal resistance of the original 1/4-wave we started with (about 140 Ohms). Huh. Now it's a bit high. They tell me that shortening the antenna below resonance will lower the resistance and introduce capacitance. But I think I have also seen in the literature that the antenna can be viewed as a transmission line. A shorted portion of parallel conductor transmission line (the folded monopole) less than 1/4-wave long looks inductive. But wait! Which will win? Will the shortness of the antenna look capacitive or will the transmission line dominate and the antenna will look inductive? Even better, is there some choice of the folded section wire diameters and spacing that will give an inductance that will exactly offset the capacitance due to shortness? So, then, is there a folded monopole of such dimensions that the resistance is 50 Ohms (due to being shorter than 1/4 wave) with no terminal reactance (due to the inductive design of the "transmission line" cancelled by the shortness of the antenna's capacitance)? Brain hurts. John, KD5YI |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Folded Dipole | Antenna | |||
Virtual ground monopole HF Antenna | Antenna | |||
Tuning a folded Dipole? | Antenna | |||
Folded monopole w/ Al sailboat mast? | Antenna | |||
Folded dipole? | Antenna |