RadioBanter - View Single Post

March 10th 06, 01:35 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna

wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Please explain how a net current with a fixed constant
non-rotating phase can possibly flow. Please explain
how a wire with 1 amp flowing in one direction and 1 amp
flowing in the other direction supports a net charge flow.

Once again this indicates you are not familiar or comfortable with
basics, and have gotten ahead of yourself by going off somehwre in a
land of reflected waves. Now you are confused, and can't make sense of
basics.

As readers can observe for themselves, you avoided answering
the question and you instead turned it into personal insults.

The generator sees a reactive load. When the generator sees a reactive
load, current and voltage are no longer in step. This is true all
through the system from source to load.

I didn't ask or say anything about voltage. The fact that you
refuse to answer my technical questions speaks volumes.

Please define "compact" in terms of the number of degrees
of phase shift measured using a traveling wave.

Phase shift in what Cecil?

The measured phase shift is in a traveling wave through a 75m
bugcatcher coil. How long does it take the traveling wave current
to flow from one end of the coil to the other? Your lumped-circuit
model presupposes instantaneous current flow for traveling waves.
Let's measure the current delay in a traveling wave to see
if your model is correct. If it is not correct, it is useless.

You cannot even begin to understand the problem if you don't
know that basic phase shift. I'm willing to bet that my 75m
bugcatcher coil has at least a 40 nanosecond delay on 4 MHz
which is a 60 degree current phase shift.

If that measured delay is in the ballpark of 40 nanoseconds
or more, it proves that your lumped-circuit model has failed
and your invalid proof is presupposed in the invalid model.

You cannot use a model that presupposes instantaneous current
flow to prove that the current flow is instantaneous. You cannot
use a model that presupposes constant current magnitude to prove
that the current has constant magnitude.

You keep trying to define the "inductor" in terms of degrees related to
standing waves ...

Not true, Tom, and just shows how confused you are about
what I have said. For the Nth time: The phase of the standing
wave current doesn't change up and down the entire length
of a 1/2WL thin dipole. Why would anyone expect it to change
at the ends of a loading coil? As far as I am concerned we
can drop any discussion of standing wave current phase. It is
meaningless. The phase that Roy measured was standing wave
phase. It was already known and is completely irrelevant. I
asked Roy to measure the traveling wave phase shift. He didn't.

I have done it and told you how, you ignore it. Roy has done it and
told you how, you ignore it.

You guys are measuring standing wave current that doesn't
flow and doesn't change phase. Your measurements are
completely meaningless and your flawed model has you
hoodwinked.

The only way to get confused on that is if someone doesn't understand
behavior of the basic component, gets in over his head and confuses
himself trying to use a tool that doesn't work, and then lashes out at
others and refuses to listen.

That's an exact description of you and your lumped circuit
analysis in a standing wave environment. Do you disagree with
Walter Maxwell?

Walt wrote:
"If an inductance is in series with a line that has reflections,
the current will NOT be the same at both ends of the inductor."

"Consequently, circuit analysis will not work when both forward
and reflected currents are present in a lumped circuit."

The component is not the problem, Tom. The problem seems to be
your feigning of total ignorance of the laws of reflection
physics in order to avoid discussing the real problem.

There you go again! Back to traveling and standing waves.

Yes, you are never going to understand what I am saying about
standing-wave antennas until you discuss traveling and standing
waves on the standing-wave antenna. Your lumped-circuit model
is known to fail in the presence of standing waves.

There you go again, back to the lowest form of debate. If you can't
understand something or get trapped, just call the other guy a liar.

No, it's a lot simpler than that. When you lie about something
I said, I call you a liar.

You very clearly said current in each terminal of the inductor has a
different phase shift several times in your posts.

One more time. The standing wave current does NOT change phase
at the ends of the coil. The standing wave current essentially
does not change phase unless a dipole is longer than 1/2WL.
The phase of the standing wave current is totally irrelevant.

The forward traveling-wave current experiences a delay through
the coil. The reflected traveling-wave current experiences a
delay through the coil. This delay can be measured on the bench.
If the delay is not negligible, your lumped-circuit model is
useless because it presupposes a delay of zero.

I can't understand what you are saying or what your point is, ...

Please don't insult my intelligence or yours. Every one of us
performed those experiments on the bench in college. Exactly
what is it about bench measuring the RF current delay through
a coil that you don't understand?

Maybe someone else can help me with your last statement.

Do you even know what a standing wave current loop is?

Maybe someone else on this group can explain or understand what you are
trying to say.

You must have missed EE203. :-) What is it about a continuous
exchange of energy between the E-field and H-field at a fixed
point on an antenna wire that you don't understand? That's
just a characteristic of standing waves. Roy has used the
same argument in the past to try to prove that reflected
energy doesn't flow. But's it's the standing wave energy
that doesn't flow.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp