Thread
:
Current in antenna loading coils controversy
View Single Post
#
380
November 12th 03, 09:40 PM
Richard Clark
Posts: n/a
On 12 Nov 2003 21:23:21 GMT,
oSaddam (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:
Richard KB7QHC wrote:
I offered an EZNEC analysis that supported (circumspectly) Yuri's
position, but he blew it off chasing rainbows.
I am terribly sorry, with all the mumbo-jumbo going on I didn't see the right
rainbow over the devils :-)
Hi Yuri,
It's fine by me to be compared to devils (munchkins in comparison to
their satanic majesty).
I have to go back and reread the thread (take a vacation :-), I guess some of
the points obvious to me that were nit picked blinded me over the diamonds
hidden. The confusion was that all I had on the W9UCW set up was what I had
published, and you assumed that was my setup/data and kept asking me about it.
If you quote a source, you are responsible for the outcome of its
challenge. It is not up to the challenger to chase down the
problematic details, and it is not your defense to say the other guy
got it wrong.
The question that leaps to mind is how are you going to replicate the
data if you were so ignorant of the original details? Even more, it
would further all discussion for you to offer a COMPLETE specification
of what you are doing (or going to do), rather than an informal ramble
around the garden with a camera.
I will be making snap-on current probe, which will make it easier to slide
along the element and observe the current without the disturbance to the
antenna and will be a bit different over the thermocouple meters. Just need a
bit more time.
This is responsive to my issue with heat - through substitution. It
doesn't completely answer it, but the data is the focus and the
reduction of error is a goal.
Thanks to all those civil pros and cons, looks like we are getting ahead. If we
can implements the phenomena properly in modeling software, it should be giant
step in properly analyzing and designing loaded antennas and elements. There
are many dBs hidden there.
Yuri, K3BU/m
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
Reply With Quote