Re: Off Topic - Antenna Design Software
Brian Howell
You may be right. Since I have never built
an antenna like this before I'm also using it as an education
tool for myself. I'd like to know enough and learn enough so
that if another project comes up in the future I'll be able to
run a design program and spit out an accurate model that I know
is correct to build a different antenna. Since I have no
personal reference for what works and what doesn't or what is
good enough and what is overkill I am leaning toward overkill as
a reference then backing off as I gain experience and
knowledge. If I am able to complete this project and learn more
about antenna design and if I build other antennas in the future
I may get to the point you are now and look back at this and say
"I was going way overboard, I could have just plugged in some
ratios and I could have saved myself a lot of time and
trouble". I guess I have to start somewhere, I just feel better
about a project when I have an idea of what works and what the
outcome will be. I would hate to spend all this money on tools,
metal stock, and hours of effort only to find out that a coat
hanger does a better job than my antenna and not knowing why my
antenna did so poorly.
Brian Howell
From: Kriss
Kliegle KA1GJU [mailto:kliegle@...]
Sent: Thursday,
September 10, 2020, 8:11 AM
Subject:
[SDR-Radio] Off Topic - Antenna Design Software
This thread reminds me of a sticker on the helm of my Tiki Barge
(next to the blender on the bar): Since you are NOT transmitting, SWR really doesn't matter all that much. Why not use the tried and true method of a dipole cut for 54.310Mhz and the reflector 5% longer and director 5% shorter. The spacing set to .125 the wavelength on the director/reflector distance to driven element. We use the above numbers for our 3 element 40M wire beam at Field Day every year with great success as both a TX and RX antenna. Occam's Razor comes to mind here as well as the KISS method. JMHO 73 Kriss KA1GJU |
|