Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
One way to do this in c++ would be to derive all types you want to pass from one base class, e.g. MyObject
enum { OBJECT1 = 1, OBJECT2 = 2};
class MyObject
{
public:
virtual int Type() = 0;
};
class Object1 : public MyObject
{
public:
virtual int Type() {return OBJECT1;}
}...
If the assumption of 300 ohms for the bowties is correct, then this is how you combine them:
All the transmission lines are 300 ohms (D/d about 6), except for the quarter wavelength either side of the balun connection at 'B'. If you make this line 424 ohm (D/d about 17), then that will...
Assuming that the feed impedance of one bay is 300 ohms, then you would run 300 ohm line to where they join, and when you join them in phase, the impedance would be 150 ohm as you say. If you want 300 ohms at the junction (to use your standard balun), then what you could do is make the last...
You won't be able to optimise your antenna simply by assembling snippets of information. In an array like this the items interact, of particular significance when you want broadband operation. You have taken a commercial design (which may or may not have been reasonably optimised), and tweaked...
You need a fairly broadband antenna to cover the UHF channels (510 - 640MHz), and you want to throw in a couple of VHF ones as well, down to 79MHz.
This means that you have to be careful in taking a narrow-band design, like that ARRL collinear, and using it for likely dimensions. Spacing to...
Another thing that occurred to me is that comparing the two feeding arrangements you show in your first post, one advantage of using open wire feeder to combine the arrays:
is that you know that you are combining the two arrays in phase. When you use separate baluns like this:
you run the...
The fact that this combiner:
gave you a significant increase in signal strength means that your impedances are nothing like you expect.
But unless you have a network analyzer, or want to mess around with antenna modelling software, you really have no way to find out. If it interests you...
I just roughly measured this splitter:
which looks identical to yours, and the transmission to the two ports are matched to around 0.2dB and less than a degree of phase difference. Also they have about 20dB of isolation. This would be good to combine your antennas, hopefully yours is similar...
This splitter:
is a dead ringer for one I have (with different branding), but the fact it states 3.5dB insertion loss means it isn't resistive. Hopefully it is a reactive in-phase splitter (where if you use it as a combiner the two inputs are added in-phase), so I would try it first.
I'd be...
If you double the number of elements and get everything right you may get 3dB extra gain less the loss in the extra combiner, whereas if you double the height you should get 6dB from increased field strength! (with a few caveats on local terrain.) Going up 40% should get you that 3dB.
Just...
Your hearing loss reminds me of my late father's, almost completely deaf in one ear and a rapid rolloff above 1kHz in the other.
About 20 years ago he presented me with a graph like yours and his initial request was to help him hear the TV, without deafening everyone else. I made him an...
It's amazing what they can integrate these days, check out the ADF5355
https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/adf5355.pdf
it's got a VCO that tunes from 3400MHz - 6800MHz (with Ls and Cs on chip), along with a PLL, and frequency doubler and dividers so it can...
This type of problem can also be solved with the Extra Element Theorem:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_element_theorem
by inspection:
\[ Z_\infty = 50||70 = 350/12 \]
\[Z_e^\infty = 60||60 = 30 \]
\[Z_e^0 = 20||30 + 40||30 = 204/7 \]
\[Z = \frac{350}{12}\frac{10 + 204/7}{10 + 30} =...
I had a quick look at that, and I'm sceptical. There appears to be no justification for the statement "At the same time the radiation resistance is raised considerably while only raising the IR losses slightly". I can't see any reason why the radiation resistance should rise, I suspect it stays...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.