On 10/14/22 7:44 AM, Zack Widup wrote:
How do the results of the two compare?
They're basically the same NEC engine underneath -
So if you have EZNEC or 4nec2, you have a UI that builds a model and hands it off to the NEC2 engine, which does the computation, then the program displays the results (graphically)
Both have useful features to do things like tapers and insulated members, often by turning one model element YOU enter into multiple elements in the model passed to NEC, or by changing some parameter in a model element.
For example 4nec2 has had a "current source" since the beginning, but NEC2 doesn't. 4nec2 simulates that by using a NT (network) card to turn a current source into a voltage source (which NEC2 does support).
And both can use the NEC4 engine, which has better modeling, and some additional features.
The real issue with NEC isn't the performance (these days, it's blindingly fast on almost any PC) it's that it describes the structure and analysis in terms of various card types (yes, originally punched cards), and keeping track of endpoints, matching segment lengths in parallel conductors, etc. by hand is a pain.
These days, most of my model building is done with python to generate NEC input decks and to process the output, but I use 4nec2 for quick visualizations.
Zack W9SZ
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 8:44 AM Jim Lux <jimlux@...> wrote:
On 10/14/22 2:25 AM, F1AMM wrote:
4nec2 is much less efficient than EZNEC. EZNEC offers, in particular, a
very good antenna geometry editor. EZNEC "opens" .NEC files but
unfortunately they are only rarely compatible because 4nec2 authorizes
variables in GW cards (lines) which EZNEC does not support.
Now that EZNEC is "free", we must abandon 4nec2 as we abandoned
MMANA-GAL Basic for 4nec2.
I prefer 4nec2's interface and it works well with other engines (e.g.
NEC4.2)
It's probably more of a personal preference thing.
