Why does Kraus include both A and r in his equation for a small-loop antenna?

  • Thread starter Thread starter qnach
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Antenna
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equations presented by Kraus for small-loop antennas, specifically questioning the necessity of including both the area (A) and the distance (r) in the equations for the far field. Participants explore the implications of these variables in the context of antenna theory and their relationship to each other.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why both A and r are included in the equations, suggesting that A could be simplified to πr².
  • Others clarify that A represents the area of the loop antenna while r is the distance from the center of the loop to the point of far field measurement.
  • One participant emphasizes that the term A/λ² is a significant ratio that appears in various antenna configurations and should not be canceled out.
  • There is a discussion about the definitions of A and r, with a participant noting that A=πr² only applies if they are part of the same circle.
  • Another participant raises a further question regarding the definition of r in the context of a receiving antenna, suggesting it may need to be defined as infinity.
  • One participant discusses the implications of making r infinite, stating that energy would approach zero as it is radiated over a greater spherical surface.
  • Reference is made to previous chapters in Kraus' book to clarify the definitions of r and retarded currents.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of including both A and r in the equations, with no consensus reached on whether they can be simplified or canceled. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these variables in the context of antenna theory.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the definitions of A and r are clearly stated in the text, but there is confusion about their relationship and applicability in the equations. The discussion highlights the complexity of modeling antennas and the potential for misunderstanding when interpreting the equations.

qnach
Messages
154
Reaction score
4
I am reading Kraus' book on Antenna, Chapter 6.
I think Eq. (8) and (9) is his solution for the far field of a small-loop antenna.
However, why does he need A (the area) and r both in the equation (8)?
A= \pi r^2 and can be simplified?
 

Attachments

Engineering news on Phys.org
It would be best if you attach the equation in question.

My guess is:
"A" is the area of the loop antenna
"r" is the distance from the center of the loop antenna to the point of far field measurement
 
the_emi_guy said:
It would be best if you attach the equation in question.

My guess is:
"A" is the area of the loop antenna
"r" is the distance from the center of the loop antenna to the point of far field measurement
o.k. I attached that page of Eq. (8) and (9)
But I think that is no use. I know the definition of A and r
But my question is why did he keep it without canceling out.
 

Attachments

  • 頁面擷取自-Kraus-Antennas-2nd.Edition-1988.jpg
    頁面擷取自-Kraus-Antennas-2nd.Edition-1988.jpg
    37.2 KB · Views: 493
qnach said:
However, why does he need A (the area) and r both in the equation (8)?
A= \pi r^2 and can be simplified?
The loop radius was a. The distance from the dipole was r. The radius of the loop was NOT r.
Since a does not appear in the equation, what can you possibly cancel ?

The term A / λ2 is a pure ratio. It is the aperture in wavelengths. It appears as a recognisable term with many antenna configurations. If it could be canceled now it would have to be extracted again later, when any shaped loop is considered.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: qnach
qnach said:
...
But I think that is no use. I know the definition of A and r
But my question is why did he keep it without canceling out.

I think we are having a hard time figuring out why you think A and r can cancel. You are right, the definitions of A and r are clearly stated in the text that you attached:
"r is the distance from the dipole" , "...the area A of the loop..."

But A=πr2 only applies if A and r are part of the same circle right?

Let A be the area of my yard, and r be the distance from the Earth to the Sun, can these cancel?
 
the_emi_guy said:
I think we are having a hard time figuring out why you think A and r can cancel. You are right, the definitions of A and r are clearly stated in the text that you attached:
"r is the distance from the dipole" , "...the area A of the loop..."

But A=πr2 only applies if A and r are part of the same circle right?

Let A be the area of my yard, and r be the distance from the Earth to the Sun, can these cancel?
sorry, I mixed up the symbols, since I can only read the book from my screen...
 
Baluncore said:
The loop radius was a. The distance from the dipole was r. The radius of the loop was NOT r.
Since a does not appear in the equation, what can you possibly cancel ?

The term A / λ2 is a pure ratio. It is the aperture in wavelengths. It appears as a recognisable term with many antenna configurations. If it could be canceled now it would have to be extracted again later, when any shaped loop is considered.
I have a further question about the r and the retarded current I.
Since I am considering the receiving antenna, the wave come from infinity.
So, how should the r be defined? Should it be infinity? And, the retarded I does not seems to be meaningful?
 
Consider a reference plane, perpendicular to the direction of r, in or near to the antenna. The retarded element currents are sinusoidal currents with phase shifts measured relative to that reference plane. All retarded element currents can then be summed as phasors in the direction of r. That gives both the receive and transmit antenna pattern.

The range, r, allows for the reduction in energy per square meter with range as the energy is radiated over a greater spherical surface. If you make r infinite the energy will be zero.

Now go back to chapter 5 in Kraus, on short dipoles. On page 203, fig 5-3b you will see a reference plane and the independent definition of r and the retarded currents.

Learning about loop antennas backwards is a very inefficient way of modelling photosynthesis.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
805