Hi Bill:
Just to add a little to the discussion we should clarify the unknown 5%
reduction
in length of the receiver antenna. The calculation made by Art is
correct for the total
length of the antenna. Since the inductance and capacitance of the
receiver is part
of the antenna. Arts calculation is for the whole system antenna plus
receiver so the 5%
reduction in length is for the receiver portion of the antenna.
Different receivers designs will affect the length of the wire antenna.
Also the frequency of the transmitter (Channel Number) will affect this
length. If you had a Spectrum Analyzer (Big Bucks) you could tune the
antenna and receiver to the optimum length for the channel. If you
don't have a Signal Analyzer the (5%) as suggested is probably the
nominal value to reduce the antenna length to make up for the average
receiver loading. How correct this value (5%) is I don't know, as bill
said the receiver antenna is not to critical.
Glenn Eiden
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000 15:07:06 -0800 "Bill Swingle"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So far we have 3 folks who have measured NIB receivers and they got:
>
> 1. 41"
> 2. 40.75"
> 3. 38.75"
>
> Our antennas are quarter wave length thus the math stated by Art
> Mcnamee is
> correct. Though his stated 5% reduction is something I've never
> heard of.
>
> For channel 11, a quarter wave antenna would be 41.005 inches.
> For channel 60, a quarter wave antenna would be 40.454 inches.
>
> Allowing for inaccuracies, tolerances and the wire inside the case I
> make my
> antennas 40 inches from case to tip. But in reality, the length
> isn't too
> critical.
>
> The latest craze to sweep the nation: Antenna Measuring!
>
> Bill Swingle
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Pleasanton, CA
>
> RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send
> "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
