If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.
Special Thanks To:
Aaron Holmes
Aaron Wheeler
Adam Horden
Alan Scrimgeour
Andre
Andrew Haynes
Anonymous000
asabase
Austin Weil
barney
Barry
Bert Hickman
Bill Kukowski
Blitzorn
Brandon Paradelas
Bruce Bowling
BubeeMike
Byong Park
Cesiumsponge
Chris F.
Chris Hooper
Corey Worthington
Derek Woodroffe
Dalus
Dan Strother
Daniel Davis
Daniel Uhrenholt
datasheetarchive
Dave Billington
Dave Marshall
David F.
Dennis Rogers
drelectrix
Dr. John Gudenas
Dr. Spark
E.TexasTesla
eastvoltresearch
Eirik Taylor
Erik Dyakov
Erlend^SE
Finn Hammer
Firebug24k
GalliumMan
Gary Peterson
George Slade
GhostNull
Gordon Mcknight
Graham Armitage
Grant
GreySoul
Henry H
IamSmooth
In memory of Leo Powning
Jacob Cash
James Howells
James Pawson
Jeff Greenfield
Jeff Thomas
Jesse Frost
Jim Mitchell
jlr134
Joe Mastroianni
John Forcina
John Oberg
John Willcutt
Jon Newcomb
klugesmith
Leslie Wright
Lutz Hoffman
Mads Barnkob
Martin King
Mats Karlsson
Matt Gibson
Matthew Guidry
mbd
Michael D'Angelo
Mikkel
mileswaldron
mister_rf
Neil Foster
Nick de Smith
Nick Soroka
nicklenorp
Nik
Norman Stanley
Patrick Coleman
Paul Brodie
Paul Jordan
Paul Montgomery
Ped
Peter Krogen
Peter Terren
PhilGood
Richard Feldman
Robert Bush
Royce Bailey
Scott Fusare
Scott Newman
smiffy
Stella
Steven Busic
Steve Conner
Steve Jones
Steve Ward
Sulaiman
Thomas Coyle
Thomas A. Wallace
Thomas W
Timo
Torch
Ulf Jonsson
vasil
Vaxian
vladi mazzilli
wastehl
Weston
William Kim
William N.
William Stehl
Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
... not Russel! Registered Member #1
Joined: Thu Jan 26 2006, 12:18AM
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Posts: 1052
wrote ...
What is characteristic impedance, after all? I don't know why you guys keep mixing it with resistance?
It is simply the ratio between the magnetic and electric fields. A piece of coaxial cable with extremely high impedance will develop very high voltages between the center conductor and the shield, and very low currents will flow. A piece of coaxial cable with very low impedance would develop very low voltages and high currents.
wrote ... My point is, if I have 50 ohm resistor, it will be 50 ohms at any frequency, and series LC still with 50 ohms characteristic impedance sqrtL/C will be a short at it's resonant frequency. You get what I mean?
This is not true with distributed inductances and capacitances, as Steve mentioned above. You could represent a piece of coaxial cable (or other transmission line) as an infinite number of inductors in series for each conductor, with an infinite number of capacitors connecting the conductors. As long as it is terminated with a resistance equal to the characteristic impedance of the transmission line, no resonances happen at all.
wrote ... I know that characteristic impedance will determine rate of resonant rise, which I assumed unimportant here. But not much more than that :/
Multiplied with series R^-1 it gives Q of the circuit.
Don't confuse characteristic impedance with feedpoint impedance. Antennas have a feedpoint impedance, which will contain a resistive and possibly a reactive element.
wrote ... Now what is really ''impedance matching'', how it works there? I know quite well of analogies with DC circuits, resistors and batteries, but how to apply this to transmission line impedances?
Simply, the feedpoint impedance of your antenna must be equal to the characteristic impedance of your feedline. If they are not equal, some power is reflected back down the feedline, resulting in a standing wave. This will probably make your transmitter unhappy, as this power must now be sent back to the antenna again. There are a number of ways you can make the impedances equal, such as pi networks, l networks, transformers... the list goes on and on, and a discussion of impedance matching could easily fill several books.
wrote ... I have one question unanswered, and that is, where is the energy stored?
In electric and magnetic fields, same as always.
wrote ... Chris talked about ''charging up'' a dipole antenna with negligible capacitance and then letting it resonate.
So, voltage is applied from the source and current flows because of relativistic delay, but into what?
Into the capacitance of the dipole. Why is that so hard to imagine? Current flows when you connect a battery to a capacitor, even though it seems it has nowhere to flow.
wrote ... And I assume it is impossible to charge up a coax cable other way than charging it's capacitance.
That's right, because it is a series of distributed inductances and capacitances. You could treat an unterminated piece of coax as a capacitor at DC, but once AC comes into play it is a transmission line.
wrote ... Maybe I need a completely different approach.
You are doing fine. You are making plenty of correct statements that indicate you understand what is going on; you just need to get your brain to accept it!
wrote ...
Alright;
So is it OK for me, to just imagine vacuum as infinite network of inductances and capacitances, with characteristic impedance of 376ohms.
After all this, it is not something too hard to imagine.
Displacement current flows in a sort of ''conductor'' which has capacitance with everything around, plus it produces magnetic field as any current would, right?
Now is ''LC resonance'' of these what is linked to just the conductor length and is responsible of all this?
You were doing well up to the end. Free space doesn't resonate. It just presents an impedance. All we are trying to do with antennas is to couple energy into free space. It happens to work very well with a resonant length of wire, but we can do it with a much longer or shorter length of wire, or we can do it with a loop of wire.
wrote ... This also forces me to conclude, that in some way, speed of light itself is actually limited and defined by the propagation delay in this transmission line. c^2=1/e0*u0?
And electromagnetic wave itself is nothing but energy transferred endlessly by magnetic and electric coupling between these LC's.
Still all this is passing around my head like a dream and I can't continue further.
Marko
Quite correct! Right on all counts. I don't know why you think you are having such a hard time with this.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
You were doing well up to the end. Free space doesn't resonate. It just presents an impedance. All we are trying to do with antennas is to couple energy into free space. It happens to work very well with a resonant length of wire, but we can do it with a much longer or shorter length of wire, or we can do it with a loop of wire.
You got to the point.. what then does resonate?
Into the capacitance of the dipole. Why is that so hard to imagine? Current flows when you connect a battery to a capacitor, even though it seems it has nowhere to flow.
That current is flowing into capacitance which doesn't exist! Remember, the dipole I described has insignificant capacitance between poles, as we solved out.
I'm trying to conceive this free space capacitance and inductance which is normally irrelevant.
Antenna's lumped resonant frequency can be something completely different.
I started to think, am I just ''tapping'' more or less of this vacuum LC's by changing the dipole length?
Simply, the feedpoint impedance of your antenna must be equal to the characteristic impedance of your feedline. If they are not equal, some power is reflected back down the feedline, resulting in a standing wave. This will probably make your transmitter unhappy, as this power must now be sent back to the antenna again. There are a number of ways you can make the impedances equal, such as pi networks, l networks, transformers... the list goes on and on, and a discussion of impedance matching could easily fill several books.
Ok, ok, but what is a standing wave in a coaxial cable? What is transmitter happiness?
What does driving some reactive power have to do with standing waves?
... not Russel! Registered Member #1
Joined: Thu Jan 26 2006, 12:18AM
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Posts: 1052
wrote ...
You got to the point.. what then does resonate?
Nothing needs to resonate at this point. We can radiate energy without a resonant dipole. It is just usually more efficient to use a resonant dipole, as transmitters don't like driving reactive loads.
wrote ... That current is flowing into capacitance which doesn't exist! Remember, the dipole I described has insignificant capacitance between poles, as we solved out.
I'm trying to conceive this free space capacitance and inductance which is normally irrelevant.
Antenna's lumped resonant frequency can be something completely different.
Make no mistake, the capacitance does exist, and it is not negligible, as Neil said above. You can easily measure it with a DMM, if you were inclined to do so. Two parallel plates aren't the only way to generate capacitance. It seems counterintuitive, I know, but two wires running in opposite directions *will* have a real capacitance between them, far more than surface areas would lead you to suspect. For example, a short dipole, about 1m on each leg, 1mm in diameter, has a capacitance of about 20pF. Increasing the diameter to 10mm increases this to about 30pF, whereas increasing the length to 10m increases the capacitance to about 135pF. This is a fairly decent amount of capacitance.
wrote ... I started to think, am I just ''tapping'' more or less of this vacuum LC's by changing the dipole length?
Basically, yes, and the result is that a longer antenna is more tighly coupled to free space, and thus has a higher radiation resistance.
wrote ... Ok, ok, but what is a standing wave in a coaxial cable? What is transmitter happiness?
What does driving some reactive power have to do with standing waves?
A standing wave can happen on any type of feedline. It happens when the impedance of the feedline is not perfectly matched to the feedpoint impedance of the antenna. When that happens, some power is not transferred to the antenna, and is instead reflected back to the transmitter. The transmitter must then send this power back to the antenna again, and another part of it will get reflected back. Long story short, the reflected power must make many more trips through your coax than non-reflected power will have to, and thus more power will end up as heat in your transmitter and coax, instead of being radiated as RF. In practical situations, a mismatch of as much as 2:1 usually results in only a slight decrease in performance, but it can be worth correcting.
Reactive components nearly always cause power to be reflected -- ie, 25 ohms of resistance and 25 ohms of inductive reactance does not make a good match to 50 ohm cable, unless you are doing something fancy with your coax, like using a matching stub. This impedance would be written as 25+25j.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
Oh..
Make no mistake, the capacitance does exist, and it is not negligible, as Neil said above. You can easily measure it with a DMM, if you were inclined to do so. Two parallel plates aren't the only way to generate capacitance. It seems counterintuitive, I know, but two wires running in opposite directions *will* have a real capacitance between them, far more than surface areas would lead you to suspect. For example, a short dipole, about 1m on each leg, 1mm in diameter, has a capacitance of about 20pF. Increasing the diameter to 10mm increases this to about 30pF, whereas increasing the length to 10m increases the capacitance to about 135pF. This is a fairly decent amount of capacitance.
SO I must say I'm back on the beginning now, with same questions.
Why does current flow into antenna at all?
You now say that is solely due to this capacitance?
Capacitance will grow with length, but I really thought it's something completely unimportant?
ANd what resonates when I *do* resonate the antenna, simply by setting it to correct length?
I can't comment this any further because I fell overwhelmed with information that looks self contradicting to me and I'm lost.
I'm embarrassed for bothering you guys this far and still getting nowhere. As of 3 AM I need to get sleep and then re-read all of this few times again.
Registered Member #286
Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 04:52AM
Location:
Posts: 399
Dont feel lost yet Marko. An antenna does have a capacitance, it also has an inductance because of its length. When driven with an RF sinewave the whole antenna does not charge up or discharge all at once. This is because of the self capacitance and inductance along the length of the antenna. There is a wave propagination through out the antenna just like a coax transimittion line. It takes time for the positive peak of the wave to reach the end of the antenna since it left the feed point.
How the antenna radiates radio energy into infinite space? You need to think of it like ripples in a pond. When you disturb a point in the pond, the energy will travel outward in waves in all direction horizontally just like a vertical dipole antenna.
Below is a model of a transmittion line. A real transmittion line has an infinite L and C along it's length. When driven with an RF source on one end of the line. The L and C will store and realise the RF energy as it propaginates its waves through out the transmittion line.
This is the best that I can explain it. Some math may help, but I do not know the mathematical theory behind it.
Registered Member #72
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 08:29AM
Location: UK St. Albans
Posts: 1659
Hi Marko,
Hang on in there.
There are several things going on.
We use terms like surge impedance, characteristic impedance, Q, frequency and the rest to simplify particular situations. But beware, they are not fundamental, or constant, and certainly not useful in all circumstances. Like any model, they can lead you astray if used outside their region of validity. All the impedances are measured in ohms, as is resistance, because they are ratios of volts to amps, or electric field to magnetic field. But the mechansim which produces this ratio is different (to a larger or smaller extent) in resistors, transmission lines, lumped LC circuits, and free space, so don't get hung up from forcing any equivalance where there is none to be had.
Usually, we design antennae to be resonant at their operating frequency, as this makes them more efficient, and then we use narrow-band models to describe them. But, if you take an antenna and then connect a battery to it, the (ideally) infinitely quick rise in voltage at the terminals has an ifinately wide frequency spectrum, and suddenly all the narrow-band models become useless. It is the same antenna, and so should be completely describable in either the time domain (pulse) or the frequency domain (sine waves). However getting from one to the other correctly is not easy to do intuitively and compeltely and correctly even for the horny-handed RF merchants on this board, let alone for someone starting out.
One very important thing that has just occured to me is that the characteristic impedance relationship between the travelling electric and magnetic waves on a transmsssion line is true *indepedandantly for each direction of wave travel*. This is, a standing wave will be high amplitude at one point and low at another, because the standing wave is the sum of waves travelling in each direction. At any given point, the votlaeges add, the currents subtract, and the ratio of absolute V to I at any point is far from constant. But break it down into leftward and rightward tracvelling waves, and it is strictly true for each.
Given that, I would say that pulse methosd are more fundamantel than narrow-band sinewave methods. Forget about surge impedance for the moment. Remember the proverb "what I hear I forget, what I see I remember, what I do I understand". I strongly recommend you do some experiments with a circuit simulator (see the HV wiki for where to get one if you don't have one already). Pull up a transmission line model, launch a step into it, observe the waveforms as you terminate it with various different resistors. Make it from several identical sections so you can observe the waveform at several points along its length. Now make a lumped equivalent from small Ls and Cs adn do the same. Now make the line impedance taper in several sections from say 75ohms at the feedpoint to a much higher impedance at an open end, and you'll see something of the behaviour of a horn (not unfortunately the energy loss to radiation, you need a full magnetic solver for that, unless you put a high value resisotor across the end). Now model an antenna from several sections of higher impedance transmission line, again modelling the radiation ressitance as a real resistor. You will always see reflections to a wideband pulse, but you will find that for narrowband (sinewave) excitation, the feedpoint impedance gets matched to the radiation resistiance at some frequencies. During the course of these experiments, you'll see propogation, reflection, standing waves, resonance, the equivalance between LC and impedance, the high voltage produced at an open dipole end from low voltages at the feedpoint. You won't unfortunately see wires to free-space matching without a magnetic solver, but hopefully that's just small part of the overall picture. If you need help with setting up any of the siumulations, then ask here.
This thread is good for you, as you will hopefully wind up with some better understanding. It's also good for us, to have to think how to cut through some of the confusing models and approximations that we use to get back to the fundamentals. Perhaps some of the contibutors to this thread can use the ideas discussed here to put good HV wiki entry together?
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
Man.
I now feel to be completely back at start.
Antennas are told to resonate with their length, not capacitance and inductance.
After I asked what causes the current to flow into it, I got what I considered pretty clear answer:
In order for an antenna to radiate, the basic requirement is this: alternating current must flow a distance through a conductor. The more current and the longer the conductor, the more the antenna radiates. Let's look at your halfwave dipole example a little more closely. Imagine what happens along the length of your dipole antenna, if a 10V sine wave is applied at the feed point. When one end is at 10V, the other end of the dipole is at 0V. They, of course, switch off rapidly, setting up a standing wave. The ends of the antenna are swinging up and down in potential, while at the feedpoint, there is almost no change in voltage at all. These large voltage potentials cause RF current to flow through the antenna. Current flows from one half of the antenna to the other, reaching maximum current right at the feedpoint. This current does the job of radiating. The total amount of current that actually flows is determined by your antenna's feedpoint impedance. In this case, roughly 73 ohms, purely resistive.
Tesla resonator is nothing but a big, slow transmission line. (I can excite it to other modes, parallel and series, but it's all defined by capacitances and inductances?)
I can't really define it's resonant frequency by length of it's wire, right?
My question, was, basically, ''why isn't antenna like a tesla coil'', why is nothing but it's electrical length length important?
And now, you guys are telling me again, that dipole is just like a tesla coil.
That sort of counters my whole idea after this thread.
Antenna can of course work like a tesla coil, in which case I understand. And I guess that chris's post is then just an esoteric explanation of capacitance?
But what in world does then it's length have to do with it?
The term of electrical length is something that has me completely lost again.
Same as with TC secondary 1/4 wavelength myth, it means nothing.
By this explanation I could change the properties of the antenna just by changing wire thickness, shape, putting something like small toploads at pole ends and etc.
Even chris's figure of 10pF difference is a huge one for a few-hundred Mhz range.
Remember the ''Other kind of resonance'' thing? What does that mean now? I guess you guys misinterpreted me.
Banned on 3/17/2009. Registered Member #487
Joined: Sun Jul 09 2006, 01:22AM
Location:
Posts: 617
I don't know if this is really relevant but at my old job I once took one of our 27MHz transmitters and wound a small 10 turn primary around the antenna (300 turns of 30 or so around a .250" delrin rod) and made it into a little tesla coil/transmitter and it worked pretty much the same. Maybe with a tiny voltage boost on the output. So without digging into it too much and writing a novel id say they're the same. lol At least in that case.
Registered Member #30
Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
Well yes, an antenna does resonate like a Tesla coil. Putting toploads on the ends of a dipole will indeed change its resonant frequency, except antenna guys prefer to call them capacity hats. And all the other changes you mentioned affect the resonant frequency too.
And a Tesla coil is a transmission line whose resonant frequency does depend on its wire length. The relationship is just pretty complex, because the capacitive and inductive couplings between turns modify the behaviour of the wave: it doesn't just travel straight along the wire and back as it would in a dipole antenna.
If you like, to an extent the wave can take shortcuts through the inter-turn couplings, so the measured resonant frequency ends up higher than you would predict if the wire were just 1/4 of a wavelength.
The only difference is that the radiation resistance of a Tesla coil is negligible compared to its characteristic impedance, so it radiates practically no power and has a very high Q. A good antenna has a radiation resistance not too different from its feedpoint impedance, hence a low Q, or a broad bandwidth.
In other words, a Tesla coil is a lousy antenna, and an antenna is a poorly designed Tesla coil that's no good at making sparks.
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.