Vertical Yagi spun at 1000 RPM: gain properties?vertical 40m antenna takeoff angleGain difference between...
Visualize a large int
Are there any Baryons that have quark-antiquark combinations?
is it biologically possible for a creature that can be compatible to reproduce with any creature?
Making a pikuach nefesh phone call on Yom Kippur - mitsva or something to be avoided?
Image Manipulation Software That Is Extendable With Custom Filters
Stamp of electrical department on letter head of recommendation letter
LTSpice Zener diode bug?
Can every type of linear filter be modelled by a convolution?
Why can a T* be passed in register, but a unique_ptr<T> cannot?
Find Max of successive Similar Values
Does using an img title attribute in addition to the alt attribute help image SEO?
Are Changelings immune to the Polymorph spell?
What plausible reasons why people forget they didn't originally live on this new planet?
Doubt about proof in Tube Lemma
Is this really played by 2200+ players?
How would a race of humanoids with tails design [vehicle] seats?
Why not 1.d4 Nf6 2.d5?
How to load GeoJSON data in OpenLayers?
Conveying the idea of "tricky"
For piano scales, should I let go of the previous key before I hit the next one?
Grade changes with auto grader
Would a spacecraft carry arc welding supplies?
Matrix class in C#
Why doesn't the nucleus have "nucleus-probability cloud"?
Vertical Yagi spun at 1000 RPM: gain properties?
vertical 40m antenna takeoff angleGain difference between half-wave and infinitesimal dipole?Does a horizontally polarised yagi antenna have the same front to back ratio for horizontal and vertical received signals?Which polarization for a Yagi antenna will have the best side rejection for received signals with vertical polarization?Would an infintely thin horitzontal yagi with zero height respond to vertical signals?What happens to a vertical Yagi when you mount it on a vertical metal pole?How can a vertical Yagi for 10 m be mounted on on a vertical metal mast and be made to work properly?Can I make ferrite paint? Will it shield my antenna from my roof?Beamwidth of omni-directional antenna with gainGive vertical antenna directional gain?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{
margin-bottom:0;
}
.everyonelovesstackoverflow{position:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;}
$begingroup$
If I were to mount my 10 m vertical Yagi on a pole with a motor attached at the bottom with the appropriate fastening and coax mounted via electrical brushes, if the Yagi is spun at say 1000 RPM would that make it have its rated gain in all directions ?
antenna-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
If I were to mount my 10 m vertical Yagi on a pole with a motor attached at the bottom with the appropriate fastening and coax mounted via electrical brushes, if the Yagi is spun at say 1000 RPM would that make it have its rated gain in all directions ?
antenna-theory
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
this is a bad idea. I don't really know why you're coming up with this, but I'll try to address what I think might be the motivation in my answer. Please be a bit careful to not ask too many "purely hypothetical but probably a bad idea" questions without doing significant research – it really binds a lot of time.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think you probably have a very interesting thing you want to achieve, but you forget to tell us – instead you ask about a rather obscure technical approach that you think might solve it. That's pretty much the definition of the X/Y problem, and I'd encourage you to add more reasoning to your questions!
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like a question that should be posted to xkcd.com site for "Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions: whatif.xkcd.com
$endgroup$
– K7PEH
2 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
If I were to mount my 10 m vertical Yagi on a pole with a motor attached at the bottom with the appropriate fastening and coax mounted via electrical brushes, if the Yagi is spun at say 1000 RPM would that make it have its rated gain in all directions ?
antenna-theory
$endgroup$
If I were to mount my 10 m vertical Yagi on a pole with a motor attached at the bottom with the appropriate fastening and coax mounted via electrical brushes, if the Yagi is spun at say 1000 RPM would that make it have its rated gain in all directions ?
antenna-theory
antenna-theory
edited 1 hour ago
Mike Waters♦
4,9302 gold badges8 silver badges37 bronze badges
4,9302 gold badges8 silver badges37 bronze badges
asked 15 hours ago
AndrewAndrew
58511 bronze badges
58511 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
this is a bad idea. I don't really know why you're coming up with this, but I'll try to address what I think might be the motivation in my answer. Please be a bit careful to not ask too many "purely hypothetical but probably a bad idea" questions without doing significant research – it really binds a lot of time.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think you probably have a very interesting thing you want to achieve, but you forget to tell us – instead you ask about a rather obscure technical approach that you think might solve it. That's pretty much the definition of the X/Y problem, and I'd encourage you to add more reasoning to your questions!
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like a question that should be posted to xkcd.com site for "Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions: whatif.xkcd.com
$endgroup$
– K7PEH
2 hours ago
add a comment
|
1
$begingroup$
this is a bad idea. I don't really know why you're coming up with this, but I'll try to address what I think might be the motivation in my answer. Please be a bit careful to not ask too many "purely hypothetical but probably a bad idea" questions without doing significant research – it really binds a lot of time.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think you probably have a very interesting thing you want to achieve, but you forget to tell us – instead you ask about a rather obscure technical approach that you think might solve it. That's pretty much the definition of the X/Y problem, and I'd encourage you to add more reasoning to your questions!
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like a question that should be posted to xkcd.com site for "Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions: whatif.xkcd.com
$endgroup$
– K7PEH
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
this is a bad idea. I don't really know why you're coming up with this, but I'll try to address what I think might be the motivation in my answer. Please be a bit careful to not ask too many "purely hypothetical but probably a bad idea" questions without doing significant research – it really binds a lot of time.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
this is a bad idea. I don't really know why you're coming up with this, but I'll try to address what I think might be the motivation in my answer. Please be a bit careful to not ask too many "purely hypothetical but probably a bad idea" questions without doing significant research – it really binds a lot of time.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I think you probably have a very interesting thing you want to achieve, but you forget to tell us – instead you ask about a rather obscure technical approach that you think might solve it. That's pretty much the definition of the X/Y problem, and I'd encourage you to add more reasoning to your questions!
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think you probably have a very interesting thing you want to achieve, but you forget to tell us – instead you ask about a rather obscure technical approach that you think might solve it. That's pretty much the definition of the X/Y problem, and I'd encourage you to add more reasoning to your questions!
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like a question that should be posted to xkcd.com site for "Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions: whatif.xkcd.com
$endgroup$
– K7PEH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Sounds like a question that should be posted to xkcd.com site for "Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions: whatif.xkcd.com
$endgroup$
– K7PEH
2 hours ago
add a comment
|
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Depending on the gain characteristics of your Yagi antenna, you’ll be adding an amplitude modulation of 16.7 or 33.3 Hz to your signal, plus a similar phase modulation. These added modulation sidebands will also add to the bandwidth used. This rotational modulation will have different phases to your original signal modulation in different directions, so your resulting signal will likely not be symmetric in all directions. If you want, control and/or synchronize to this asymmetry, you could use this for some sore of directional beacon or radar.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
rated gain in all directions ?
No. And a lot more problems. Primarily, for any thinkable use case, this is a bad idea.
What rotating the antenna will do is of course rotate the antenna pattern, "averaging out" (over the curse of a multiple of a rotation period) the antenna pattern to look like a circle, i.e. equally good (or bad) in all directions; the average gain of the original Yagi's radiation pattern, not the maximum gain.
If you wanted that, using a high-gain antenna type like a Yagi would be a terrible idea – just use the dipole (the driven element in your yagi), and you'd instantly have an omnidirectional antenna for a fraction of the effort, cost, maintenance, complexity and hazard!
1000 rpm = 116.7 Hz would be far too slow for anything useful: Let's focus on the transmit side for a second here; since antennas are reciprocal, the exact same things apply to receive.
So, you're transmitting with your antenna. That means that your antenna's main beam sweeps around. A receiver in a specific direction will hence see "strong signal" when he's in the main beam's direction 16.7 times per second, and all the other times they'd see little signal power at all.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth significantly larger than 16.7 Hz, this simply constitutes slow fading over a cyclostationary signal: The "very strong for short, bad rest of the time, 16.7 times per second" is typically harder to solve than an averagely moderately low receive power, because it contains an element of temporal change in addition to the majority-of-time-bad receive power. In essence, for a looooong duration, your signal will be unusable, if you needed any gain to begin with, and from the short duration where it's good, you'd need to reconstruct the lost part.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth lower than 16.7 Hz, this constitutes fast fading, i.e. the channel changes within the duration of one symbol; for anything that requires coherency (FM, PSK, most FSK, QAM, …), that simply means broken transmission. For power-detection only systems (e.g. AM, OOK, PPM), that might be workable by averaging out, but still not really desirable.
- For any system that has a signal bandwidth of roundabout 16.7 Hz, this is kind of neither and kind of both, and you'd really want to avoid that situation, because your rotation influence becomes statistically indistinguishable from your signal, and then no communication will be possible.
Basically all useful communication systems fall in the first category.
You can also look at this from the perspective of Doppler: by rotating the antenna, you'd constantly be shifting the phase center of the antenna, relative to a fixed direction. That means that you're modulating the phase of the signal with a periodic function – and that's a frequency shift, just like a Doppler effect caused by your communication partner moving rapidly towards you and away from your 16.7 times per second.
The only use case I could make out for this is in an indoor scenario with a lot of multipath propagation, you could get some temporal diversity for a diversity combination scheme. But that wouldn't incorporate "masts", and it would be at much higher frequencies (2 GHz and upwards), and it would happen at not about 17, but 100,0000 to 1 million rotations per second, and it wouldn't happen through rotating a physical antenna, but through digital beamforming or antenna switching.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
@PeteNU9W oh, shoot, yeah, will fix that.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
As has already been stated, this will add amplitude modulation to your signal — you will "achieve its rated gain in all directions" but only at the peak of the modulation; the average will be much less, equivalent to an antenna with no azimuth gain but a similar elevation gain pattern.
You and other readers might be interested to learn that this modulation has actually been used intentionally, in the aircraft navigation system VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR). This system allows an aircraft to, by receiving signals from a ground station, determine the compass direction in which the aircraft lies relative to the ground station.
The system in its original form worked by spinning a directional antenna at 30 Hz, causing amplitude modulation of the signal. The station also transmits, on the same carrier frequency but from a non-directional antenna, a subcarrier also frequency modulated at 30 Hz (like FM stereo encoding or AFSK). By comparing the phase of the amplitude modulation (varies with direction of the receiver) to the phase of the frequency modulation (does not vary), the direction can be obtained.
Later VOR stations replaced the rotating antenna with a circular phased array, so that the mechanical rotation could be replaced with electronic, but the signal is received and decoded the same way.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function () {
StackExchange.schematics.init();
});
}, "cicuitlab");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "520"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fham.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15503%2fvertical-yagi-spun-at-1000-rpm-gain-properties%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Depending on the gain characteristics of your Yagi antenna, you’ll be adding an amplitude modulation of 16.7 or 33.3 Hz to your signal, plus a similar phase modulation. These added modulation sidebands will also add to the bandwidth used. This rotational modulation will have different phases to your original signal modulation in different directions, so your resulting signal will likely not be symmetric in all directions. If you want, control and/or synchronize to this asymmetry, you could use this for some sore of directional beacon or radar.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Depending on the gain characteristics of your Yagi antenna, you’ll be adding an amplitude modulation of 16.7 or 33.3 Hz to your signal, plus a similar phase modulation. These added modulation sidebands will also add to the bandwidth used. This rotational modulation will have different phases to your original signal modulation in different directions, so your resulting signal will likely not be symmetric in all directions. If you want, control and/or synchronize to this asymmetry, you could use this for some sore of directional beacon or radar.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Depending on the gain characteristics of your Yagi antenna, you’ll be adding an amplitude modulation of 16.7 or 33.3 Hz to your signal, plus a similar phase modulation. These added modulation sidebands will also add to the bandwidth used. This rotational modulation will have different phases to your original signal modulation in different directions, so your resulting signal will likely not be symmetric in all directions. If you want, control and/or synchronize to this asymmetry, you could use this for some sore of directional beacon or radar.
$endgroup$
Depending on the gain characteristics of your Yagi antenna, you’ll be adding an amplitude modulation of 16.7 or 33.3 Hz to your signal, plus a similar phase modulation. These added modulation sidebands will also add to the bandwidth used. This rotational modulation will have different phases to your original signal modulation in different directions, so your resulting signal will likely not be symmetric in all directions. If you want, control and/or synchronize to this asymmetry, you could use this for some sore of directional beacon or radar.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
hotpaw2hotpaw2
4,2852 gold badges20 silver badges39 bronze badges
4,2852 gold badges20 silver badges39 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
rated gain in all directions ?
No. And a lot more problems. Primarily, for any thinkable use case, this is a bad idea.
What rotating the antenna will do is of course rotate the antenna pattern, "averaging out" (over the curse of a multiple of a rotation period) the antenna pattern to look like a circle, i.e. equally good (or bad) in all directions; the average gain of the original Yagi's radiation pattern, not the maximum gain.
If you wanted that, using a high-gain antenna type like a Yagi would be a terrible idea – just use the dipole (the driven element in your yagi), and you'd instantly have an omnidirectional antenna for a fraction of the effort, cost, maintenance, complexity and hazard!
1000 rpm = 116.7 Hz would be far too slow for anything useful: Let's focus on the transmit side for a second here; since antennas are reciprocal, the exact same things apply to receive.
So, you're transmitting with your antenna. That means that your antenna's main beam sweeps around. A receiver in a specific direction will hence see "strong signal" when he's in the main beam's direction 16.7 times per second, and all the other times they'd see little signal power at all.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth significantly larger than 16.7 Hz, this simply constitutes slow fading over a cyclostationary signal: The "very strong for short, bad rest of the time, 16.7 times per second" is typically harder to solve than an averagely moderately low receive power, because it contains an element of temporal change in addition to the majority-of-time-bad receive power. In essence, for a looooong duration, your signal will be unusable, if you needed any gain to begin with, and from the short duration where it's good, you'd need to reconstruct the lost part.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth lower than 16.7 Hz, this constitutes fast fading, i.e. the channel changes within the duration of one symbol; for anything that requires coherency (FM, PSK, most FSK, QAM, …), that simply means broken transmission. For power-detection only systems (e.g. AM, OOK, PPM), that might be workable by averaging out, but still not really desirable.
- For any system that has a signal bandwidth of roundabout 16.7 Hz, this is kind of neither and kind of both, and you'd really want to avoid that situation, because your rotation influence becomes statistically indistinguishable from your signal, and then no communication will be possible.
Basically all useful communication systems fall in the first category.
You can also look at this from the perspective of Doppler: by rotating the antenna, you'd constantly be shifting the phase center of the antenna, relative to a fixed direction. That means that you're modulating the phase of the signal with a periodic function – and that's a frequency shift, just like a Doppler effect caused by your communication partner moving rapidly towards you and away from your 16.7 times per second.
The only use case I could make out for this is in an indoor scenario with a lot of multipath propagation, you could get some temporal diversity for a diversity combination scheme. But that wouldn't incorporate "masts", and it would be at much higher frequencies (2 GHz and upwards), and it would happen at not about 17, but 100,0000 to 1 million rotations per second, and it wouldn't happen through rotating a physical antenna, but through digital beamforming or antenna switching.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
@PeteNU9W oh, shoot, yeah, will fix that.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
rated gain in all directions ?
No. And a lot more problems. Primarily, for any thinkable use case, this is a bad idea.
What rotating the antenna will do is of course rotate the antenna pattern, "averaging out" (over the curse of a multiple of a rotation period) the antenna pattern to look like a circle, i.e. equally good (or bad) in all directions; the average gain of the original Yagi's radiation pattern, not the maximum gain.
If you wanted that, using a high-gain antenna type like a Yagi would be a terrible idea – just use the dipole (the driven element in your yagi), and you'd instantly have an omnidirectional antenna for a fraction of the effort, cost, maintenance, complexity and hazard!
1000 rpm = 116.7 Hz would be far too slow for anything useful: Let's focus on the transmit side for a second here; since antennas are reciprocal, the exact same things apply to receive.
So, you're transmitting with your antenna. That means that your antenna's main beam sweeps around. A receiver in a specific direction will hence see "strong signal" when he's in the main beam's direction 16.7 times per second, and all the other times they'd see little signal power at all.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth significantly larger than 16.7 Hz, this simply constitutes slow fading over a cyclostationary signal: The "very strong for short, bad rest of the time, 16.7 times per second" is typically harder to solve than an averagely moderately low receive power, because it contains an element of temporal change in addition to the majority-of-time-bad receive power. In essence, for a looooong duration, your signal will be unusable, if you needed any gain to begin with, and from the short duration where it's good, you'd need to reconstruct the lost part.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth lower than 16.7 Hz, this constitutes fast fading, i.e. the channel changes within the duration of one symbol; for anything that requires coherency (FM, PSK, most FSK, QAM, …), that simply means broken transmission. For power-detection only systems (e.g. AM, OOK, PPM), that might be workable by averaging out, but still not really desirable.
- For any system that has a signal bandwidth of roundabout 16.7 Hz, this is kind of neither and kind of both, and you'd really want to avoid that situation, because your rotation influence becomes statistically indistinguishable from your signal, and then no communication will be possible.
Basically all useful communication systems fall in the first category.
You can also look at this from the perspective of Doppler: by rotating the antenna, you'd constantly be shifting the phase center of the antenna, relative to a fixed direction. That means that you're modulating the phase of the signal with a periodic function – and that's a frequency shift, just like a Doppler effect caused by your communication partner moving rapidly towards you and away from your 16.7 times per second.
The only use case I could make out for this is in an indoor scenario with a lot of multipath propagation, you could get some temporal diversity for a diversity combination scheme. But that wouldn't incorporate "masts", and it would be at much higher frequencies (2 GHz and upwards), and it would happen at not about 17, but 100,0000 to 1 million rotations per second, and it wouldn't happen through rotating a physical antenna, but through digital beamforming or antenna switching.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
@PeteNU9W oh, shoot, yeah, will fix that.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
rated gain in all directions ?
No. And a lot more problems. Primarily, for any thinkable use case, this is a bad idea.
What rotating the antenna will do is of course rotate the antenna pattern, "averaging out" (over the curse of a multiple of a rotation period) the antenna pattern to look like a circle, i.e. equally good (or bad) in all directions; the average gain of the original Yagi's radiation pattern, not the maximum gain.
If you wanted that, using a high-gain antenna type like a Yagi would be a terrible idea – just use the dipole (the driven element in your yagi), and you'd instantly have an omnidirectional antenna for a fraction of the effort, cost, maintenance, complexity and hazard!
1000 rpm = 116.7 Hz would be far too slow for anything useful: Let's focus on the transmit side for a second here; since antennas are reciprocal, the exact same things apply to receive.
So, you're transmitting with your antenna. That means that your antenna's main beam sweeps around. A receiver in a specific direction will hence see "strong signal" when he's in the main beam's direction 16.7 times per second, and all the other times they'd see little signal power at all.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth significantly larger than 16.7 Hz, this simply constitutes slow fading over a cyclostationary signal: The "very strong for short, bad rest of the time, 16.7 times per second" is typically harder to solve than an averagely moderately low receive power, because it contains an element of temporal change in addition to the majority-of-time-bad receive power. In essence, for a looooong duration, your signal will be unusable, if you needed any gain to begin with, and from the short duration where it's good, you'd need to reconstruct the lost part.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth lower than 16.7 Hz, this constitutes fast fading, i.e. the channel changes within the duration of one symbol; for anything that requires coherency (FM, PSK, most FSK, QAM, …), that simply means broken transmission. For power-detection only systems (e.g. AM, OOK, PPM), that might be workable by averaging out, but still not really desirable.
- For any system that has a signal bandwidth of roundabout 16.7 Hz, this is kind of neither and kind of both, and you'd really want to avoid that situation, because your rotation influence becomes statistically indistinguishable from your signal, and then no communication will be possible.
Basically all useful communication systems fall in the first category.
You can also look at this from the perspective of Doppler: by rotating the antenna, you'd constantly be shifting the phase center of the antenna, relative to a fixed direction. That means that you're modulating the phase of the signal with a periodic function – and that's a frequency shift, just like a Doppler effect caused by your communication partner moving rapidly towards you and away from your 16.7 times per second.
The only use case I could make out for this is in an indoor scenario with a lot of multipath propagation, you could get some temporal diversity for a diversity combination scheme. But that wouldn't incorporate "masts", and it would be at much higher frequencies (2 GHz and upwards), and it would happen at not about 17, but 100,0000 to 1 million rotations per second, and it wouldn't happen through rotating a physical antenna, but through digital beamforming or antenna switching.
$endgroup$
rated gain in all directions ?
No. And a lot more problems. Primarily, for any thinkable use case, this is a bad idea.
What rotating the antenna will do is of course rotate the antenna pattern, "averaging out" (over the curse of a multiple of a rotation period) the antenna pattern to look like a circle, i.e. equally good (or bad) in all directions; the average gain of the original Yagi's radiation pattern, not the maximum gain.
If you wanted that, using a high-gain antenna type like a Yagi would be a terrible idea – just use the dipole (the driven element in your yagi), and you'd instantly have an omnidirectional antenna for a fraction of the effort, cost, maintenance, complexity and hazard!
1000 rpm = 116.7 Hz would be far too slow for anything useful: Let's focus on the transmit side for a second here; since antennas are reciprocal, the exact same things apply to receive.
So, you're transmitting with your antenna. That means that your antenna's main beam sweeps around. A receiver in a specific direction will hence see "strong signal" when he's in the main beam's direction 16.7 times per second, and all the other times they'd see little signal power at all.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth significantly larger than 16.7 Hz, this simply constitutes slow fading over a cyclostationary signal: The "very strong for short, bad rest of the time, 16.7 times per second" is typically harder to solve than an averagely moderately low receive power, because it contains an element of temporal change in addition to the majority-of-time-bad receive power. In essence, for a looooong duration, your signal will be unusable, if you needed any gain to begin with, and from the short duration where it's good, you'd need to reconstruct the lost part.
- For any signal that has a bandwidth lower than 16.7 Hz, this constitutes fast fading, i.e. the channel changes within the duration of one symbol; for anything that requires coherency (FM, PSK, most FSK, QAM, …), that simply means broken transmission. For power-detection only systems (e.g. AM, OOK, PPM), that might be workable by averaging out, but still not really desirable.
- For any system that has a signal bandwidth of roundabout 16.7 Hz, this is kind of neither and kind of both, and you'd really want to avoid that situation, because your rotation influence becomes statistically indistinguishable from your signal, and then no communication will be possible.
Basically all useful communication systems fall in the first category.
You can also look at this from the perspective of Doppler: by rotating the antenna, you'd constantly be shifting the phase center of the antenna, relative to a fixed direction. That means that you're modulating the phase of the signal with a periodic function – and that's a frequency shift, just like a Doppler effect caused by your communication partner moving rapidly towards you and away from your 16.7 times per second.
The only use case I could make out for this is in an indoor scenario with a lot of multipath propagation, you could get some temporal diversity for a diversity combination scheme. But that wouldn't incorporate "masts", and it would be at much higher frequencies (2 GHz and upwards), and it would happen at not about 17, but 100,0000 to 1 million rotations per second, and it wouldn't happen through rotating a physical antenna, but through digital beamforming or antenna switching.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
Marcus MüllerMarcus Müller
8,66511 silver badges33 bronze badges
8,66511 silver badges33 bronze badges
$begingroup$
@PeteNU9W oh, shoot, yeah, will fix that.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
@PeteNU9W oh, shoot, yeah, will fix that.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeteNU9W oh, shoot, yeah, will fix that.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeteNU9W oh, shoot, yeah, will fix that.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
As has already been stated, this will add amplitude modulation to your signal — you will "achieve its rated gain in all directions" but only at the peak of the modulation; the average will be much less, equivalent to an antenna with no azimuth gain but a similar elevation gain pattern.
You and other readers might be interested to learn that this modulation has actually been used intentionally, in the aircraft navigation system VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR). This system allows an aircraft to, by receiving signals from a ground station, determine the compass direction in which the aircraft lies relative to the ground station.
The system in its original form worked by spinning a directional antenna at 30 Hz, causing amplitude modulation of the signal. The station also transmits, on the same carrier frequency but from a non-directional antenna, a subcarrier also frequency modulated at 30 Hz (like FM stereo encoding or AFSK). By comparing the phase of the amplitude modulation (varies with direction of the receiver) to the phase of the frequency modulation (does not vary), the direction can be obtained.
Later VOR stations replaced the rotating antenna with a circular phased array, so that the mechanical rotation could be replaced with electronic, but the signal is received and decoded the same way.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
As has already been stated, this will add amplitude modulation to your signal — you will "achieve its rated gain in all directions" but only at the peak of the modulation; the average will be much less, equivalent to an antenna with no azimuth gain but a similar elevation gain pattern.
You and other readers might be interested to learn that this modulation has actually been used intentionally, in the aircraft navigation system VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR). This system allows an aircraft to, by receiving signals from a ground station, determine the compass direction in which the aircraft lies relative to the ground station.
The system in its original form worked by spinning a directional antenna at 30 Hz, causing amplitude modulation of the signal. The station also transmits, on the same carrier frequency but from a non-directional antenna, a subcarrier also frequency modulated at 30 Hz (like FM stereo encoding or AFSK). By comparing the phase of the amplitude modulation (varies with direction of the receiver) to the phase of the frequency modulation (does not vary), the direction can be obtained.
Later VOR stations replaced the rotating antenna with a circular phased array, so that the mechanical rotation could be replaced with electronic, but the signal is received and decoded the same way.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
As has already been stated, this will add amplitude modulation to your signal — you will "achieve its rated gain in all directions" but only at the peak of the modulation; the average will be much less, equivalent to an antenna with no azimuth gain but a similar elevation gain pattern.
You and other readers might be interested to learn that this modulation has actually been used intentionally, in the aircraft navigation system VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR). This system allows an aircraft to, by receiving signals from a ground station, determine the compass direction in which the aircraft lies relative to the ground station.
The system in its original form worked by spinning a directional antenna at 30 Hz, causing amplitude modulation of the signal. The station also transmits, on the same carrier frequency but from a non-directional antenna, a subcarrier also frequency modulated at 30 Hz (like FM stereo encoding or AFSK). By comparing the phase of the amplitude modulation (varies with direction of the receiver) to the phase of the frequency modulation (does not vary), the direction can be obtained.
Later VOR stations replaced the rotating antenna with a circular phased array, so that the mechanical rotation could be replaced with electronic, but the signal is received and decoded the same way.
$endgroup$
As has already been stated, this will add amplitude modulation to your signal — you will "achieve its rated gain in all directions" but only at the peak of the modulation; the average will be much less, equivalent to an antenna with no azimuth gain but a similar elevation gain pattern.
You and other readers might be interested to learn that this modulation has actually been used intentionally, in the aircraft navigation system VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR). This system allows an aircraft to, by receiving signals from a ground station, determine the compass direction in which the aircraft lies relative to the ground station.
The system in its original form worked by spinning a directional antenna at 30 Hz, causing amplitude modulation of the signal. The station also transmits, on the same carrier frequency but from a non-directional antenna, a subcarrier also frequency modulated at 30 Hz (like FM stereo encoding or AFSK). By comparing the phase of the amplitude modulation (varies with direction of the receiver) to the phase of the frequency modulation (does not vary), the direction can be obtained.
Later VOR stations replaced the rotating antenna with a circular phased array, so that the mechanical rotation could be replaced with electronic, but the signal is received and decoded the same way.
answered 1 hour ago
Kevin Reid AG6YO♦Kevin Reid AG6YO
18.5k4 gold badges36 silver badges81 bronze badges
18.5k4 gold badges36 silver badges81 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Amateur Radio Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fham.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15503%2fvertical-yagi-spun-at-1000-rpm-gain-properties%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
this is a bad idea. I don't really know why you're coming up with this, but I'll try to address what I think might be the motivation in my answer. Please be a bit careful to not ask too many "purely hypothetical but probably a bad idea" questions without doing significant research – it really binds a lot of time.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think you probably have a very interesting thing you want to achieve, but you forget to tell us – instead you ask about a rather obscure technical approach that you think might solve it. That's pretty much the definition of the X/Y problem, and I'd encourage you to add more reasoning to your questions!
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Sounds like a question that should be posted to xkcd.com site for "Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions: whatif.xkcd.com
$endgroup$
– K7PEH
2 hours ago