1
$\begingroup$

can someone tell me what are the formulas of HPBW for a helical antenna?

I've searched a lot and I saw that there are two different formulas of HPBW for the helical antenna,

this one,

$$ \mathbf{(HPBW)} = [\frac{52}{C} \sqrt{\frac{\lambda^2}{NS}}] $$

and this one,

$$ \mathrm{HPBW} \simeq \frac{52}{\frac C\lambda \sqrt\frac{NS}{\lambda}} \mathrm{degrees} $$

so what is the difference between both ?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ One of them is wrong by an exponent in $\lambda$. Otherwise, with applying the basic calculus rules for division and roots, they are identical. $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Sep 18 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ Hello Abdullah, and welcome to this site! :-) $\endgroup$ – Mike Waters Sep 18 at 21:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The Gain is extremely sensitive to the error in winding geometry from an ideal helical shape thus the latter equation from Kraus leads to higher gain than best effort by a few dB using $$HPBW = k \lambda ^{\dfrac{3}{2}}$$ $\endgroup$ – Tony Stewart Sunnyskyguy EE75 Sep 19 at 15:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hello Abdullah, I replaced your equations in .png files with MathJax equations. Here's a quick introduction to MathJax. $\endgroup$ – rclocher3 Sep 29 at 16:21
0
$\begingroup$

They're the same, but the second one is better :)

It's more intuitive to separate the diameter and the spacing, and it's clearer that the whole thing is unitless.

Be aware that this only holds for a narrow range of diameters and spacings.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ They're supposed to be the same, and one of them is wrong. Compare the exponents of $\lambda$... $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Sep 18 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ Oh, yes. Let me scratch in my Klaus, he invented all of these approximations. $\endgroup$ – tomnexus Sep 18 at 21:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.