I see that most of your questions about inverted L antennas have been
answered.

The questions you asked (quoted below) illustrate the danger of trying
to oversimplify antenna operation. For example, the problem with the
"inductor at the top of the vertical" is simply that the horizontal leg
isn't just an "inductor at the top of the vertical". If you consider it
one, you end up with dilemmas like you've encountered. Likewise,
dividing wires into two separate and distinct classes of "phasing lines"
and "radiators" gives you no room for wires which do both simultaneously
(let alone deal with "phasing lines" whose phase shift doesn't equal the
electrical length of the line, which often happens).

You'll have to develop a more basic understanding of antenna operation,
and avoid trying to pigeonhole antenna characteristics into a convenient
handful of categories, if you're ever to have antennas make sense and
cease being "voodoo". The EZNEC demo is a way many people have found to
help learn what's going on. If you do download the demo, be sure to go
through the "Test Drive" tutorial to get started. If you don't find
EZNEC to be your cup of tea, there are now a number of free antenna
analysis programs available, and you'll probably find one that's to your
liking.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

nbr wrote:

Thanks for the recent comments on my previous post. They have been
interesting and informative.

The "antenna voodoo" is still bothering me about the theory of some of
these antennas (e.g. inverted-L, half-square, etc.). I understand that
the horizontal leg of the "L" is considered an "inductor at the top of
the vertical" element, but why not the reverse? Why is this not a
"bent horizontal" with segments which radiate both in the horizontal
and vertical planes? Why is the horizontal sengment of a 1/2-square
considered a "phasing line" and not a radiator?

73
Dan (K0DAN)