I haven't seen or heard of anything related to that in 4NEC2. When I tell it where a feed point is it just marks a segment as a feed point. To be fair, I haven't really looked either. It is possible that that is a feature you have access to that I do not. That would potentially be a difference we both had with your model that we may have to account for in the future as, as far as I know, I have to have a segment in the spot of the feed point.
That isn't the first time that has happened between us, and it likely won't be the last. As long as we are aware of the possibility.
Actually it isn't. NEC2 never really handled taper very well, even before the days of EZNec and 4Nec2. Some programs have inbuilt calculators for said taper, I know the one in 4Nec2 was tested directly against the taper feature in MiniNec, as that was was known to be very accurate. That being said, I have never used the taper feature of 4Nec2. I never felt the need to use it. I can say the 4Nec2 version of this uses some formula to set the entire length of an element to a single diameter that will act like the taper. Through my own experimenting, I don't see this making a significant difference, although now that I am including things like the material the antenna was made from, and beginning to include matching circuits that are actually tunable while on the antenna, and other ideas I might come up with to increase accuracy, this may one day change.
Yes I was.
The thing about the gamma match, it requires added capacitance to be added to an element. I don't know if EZNec can do that or not. On that the ball is in your court.
This was a response to me talking about variables. In 4Nec2 I can create a variable called height. I can then use that in place of an actual height measurement when putting data into the wire data screen. I can make another variable called length, and use that as a way to define the length of the vertical element on the antenna. For the tip of the antenna in the Z coordinate I can type height+length, and the program adds them together. I can then simply change the height variable if I want to change the entire height of the antenna, instead of having to enter the new info in for every Z coordinate point.
That is a feature built into Nec2 that 4Nec2 takes advantage of. It is actually a pretty powerful feature once you figure it out, as I used it in the Vector model above to define the ring radius on both the X and Y axis, but I included a formula to calculate 12 other points on the ring. If I want a ring of 19 inches, it gives me a circle of 16 points and the wires between them for 19 inches. If I want a different sized ring I just change the 19 inches to whatever radius I want to use. With this use, think of it as a means of automating a process that I would have to calculate by hand every time I wanted to change the diameter of said ring. That is what I have used it for in the past and I still use the feature mainly the same today.
Yes, those were Ghz24's words, although I generally agreed, I didn't really understand how said feature worked, I have learned more about it since, and still have a ways to go.
The optimization feature also uses those variables we talked about above. It does seem to be a bit touchy about them though.
If you need help ask. Just be aware that when you say apple I might hear orange, I'll keep that in mind as well.
You know what, when I made that Vector model, I didn't check the ground type it used... Hmm... Well, when I get time I'll double check and retune if necessary. Its not a total loss as I wasn't finished toying with it anyway...
I just did that real quick. The pattern looks pretty much the same, the tune still meets my requirements, but the gain dropped some, it now has 4.94 dBi gain.
I'm just busy right now, maybe next week I'll get a chance to play with these models again...
The DB
