On 5 Dec, 14:56, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Richard Fry wrote:

"Field in mV/m for 1 kW at 1 km Elevation pattern----"

Richard`s field strengths are consistent with Terman`s formula for
field strength on page 864 of his 1955 opus, equation (23-1):

E = 60pi/d (length/lambda) I cos theta (cos omega) (t-d/c)

Theta is the vertical elevation angle and, of course, at zero degrees
(the horizontal) cos theta =1, and at 90 degrees, cos theta = zero.
This gives the field strength from an elementary vertical doublet as
diagrammed on the next page. Omega is the angular frequency. I is the
uniform current through the element.

Terman says: "The laws governing such radiation are obtained by using
Maxwell`s equations to express the fields associated with the wire; when
this is done there is found to be a component, termed the radiated
field, having a strength rhat varies inversely with distance."

The 1/4-wave vertical along with its image in a perfect ground is shown
on page 887 to have the same elevation pattern.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard,
For goodness sake read the operative word of this side thread.
It is RESULTANT VECTORreferring to the summation of all vectors of a
radiator.
Every thing you are saying has no relavence to this term what so ever.
Prove to the world yourself that maximum horizontal polarised
radiation occurs when the radiator is parallel to the earths surface
and be done with it. You surely are aware of antenna computor
programs,
use them or enquire.
You are surely aware that physics have moved on in the last fifty
years
and you can't bury yourself or bring the past into the present because
of your reluctance to change because of your work years experiences.
You have a antenna computor program expert in this group whose
program
which is based on Maxwellian laws confirm that for maximum horizontal
polarization the radiator is tipped away from the earth's surface with
respect to parallism.
These are not my laws, they are Maxwells.
It is not my program design, it is Roy's.
If you want to disagree with his programs findings take it up with
him,
(he stands by on this newsgroup solely to support EZNEC and welcomes
questions) or any author of NEC2,NEC4 or mininec computor programs,
all of which show the same results.
Put away your Terman bible which represents the past and address
the subject at hand today and throw away your resume of the past.
Remember the subject key word " resultant vector" It is clear,
it means what it says. It is not open to substitutions like
substituting total gain for total horizontally polarized gain.
Why O why do participants such as yourself want to elongate all
threads
by imposing deliberate deviations that reflect the decline of an aged
brain and respective reading skills
Regards
Art
Art