Terminator3
Advanced Member level 3
What would be more correct for calculations:
1) connecting two antennas centers with point reflector using non-parallel lines
or
2) connecting two antenna centers with point reflector Z-position using parallel lines (so the second line does not ends exactly on point reflector, but altered in Y-direction by antenna distance)
or
3) divide reflector surface to many points and use (1) many times to sum up phase difference
i am puzzled with this. When distance is big, then book solution with parallel lines looks right, because lines almost parallel. When distance becomes small and object is small too, then parallel lines seems to be incorrect, and we must connect each antenna to point reflector with separate line.
Also:
if we have phase-monopulse receiver with two antennas, can we also use amplitude monopulse to make it more robust? I think not, because antenna distances are too small in phase monopulse, so it is too difficult to calibrate (different mixer, antenna tolerances, etc.)
1) connecting two antennas centers with point reflector using non-parallel lines
or
2) connecting two antenna centers with point reflector Z-position using parallel lines (so the second line does not ends exactly on point reflector, but altered in Y-direction by antenna distance)
or
3) divide reflector surface to many points and use (1) many times to sum up phase difference
i am puzzled with this. When distance is big, then book solution with parallel lines looks right, because lines almost parallel. When distance becomes small and object is small too, then parallel lines seems to be incorrect, and we must connect each antenna to point reflector with separate line.
Also:
if we have phase-monopulse receiver with two antennas, can we also use amplitude monopulse to make it more robust? I think not, because antenna distances are too small in phase monopulse, so it is too difficult to calibrate (different mixer, antenna tolerances, etc.)