Contents

Talk:Aperture (antenna)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Electronics Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from Antenna effective area was copied or moved into Antenna aperture with [permanent diff this edit]. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Generally, antenna gain is increased by directing radiation in a single direction, while necessarily reducing it in all other directions since power cannot be created by the antenna. Thus the higher the gain, the larger the aperture and the narrower the beamwidth.

Does this mean the beamwidth will become narrower as a result of a larger aperture, or are beamwidth and aperture size independant variables that both affect gain? 121.45.235.106 12:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first. Increasing the effective aperture eventually results in a narrower beamwidth.

The gain of an antenna depends entirely on the (effective) aperture size (and the frequency of the transmitted signal), as shown by the gain formula in this article. The beamwidth has no direct effect on the gain. High gain implies narrow beamwidth, but not vice-versa.

I would like to point out, that the parameter that depends only on aperture size is not the gain. It is directivity D, as gain includes the loss inherent to the antenna chain. Cweickhmann (talk) 08:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For example, spreading apart the individual antennas of a phased array of antennas has no effect on the gain (or the effective aperture), but does give a narrower beamwidth. See the thinned-array curse article for details.

The effective aperture size of a "thinned" phased array of antennas (the total of the effective aperture size of all the antennas), and the separation between its antennas, are two independent variables that both effect the radiation pattern (in particular, the beamwidth) of the phased array.

Does that answer your question?

Is there any way we could improve the article to make this more obvious? --DavidCary (talk) 02:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I want to pose a question related to above texts and I would be so happy if someone answer it. For aperture type of antenna, we have the maximum reachable directivity formula which is depend on the effective aperture area and lambda^2. I want to know if it is a general fact and is true for the maximum directivity in all types of antenna? In another word, supposing an area with a specific size as an antenna, what is the maximum directivity we could expect from that. please consider using any types of antenna including phased arrays and also mention which antenna type can lead to the most directivity for a specified antenna size. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reza.naderi.j (talk • contribs) 09:08, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is claimed that large dish antennas can have apertures nearly equal to their phyisical areas. That is equivalent to nearly % 100 efficiency. But in article antenna effective area maximum reported efficiancy has been given as % 85. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 03:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--Chetvorno^TALK 14:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the notice to the top - Christian75 (talk) 10:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]