View Single Post
  #4   Report Post  
Old December 4th 09, 12:04 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Registered User Registered User is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Apr 2007
Posts: 73
Default Faraday shields and radiation and misinterpretations

On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:13:57 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:51:05 -0500, Registered User
wrote:

- good stuff from RC snipped -

Either way I've learned as current varies the fields it produces will
vary. If the fields vary they're not static. Too simplistic? What am I
missing?


Static comes in two flavors. One means "not moving." The other means
high potential (which can be "not moving" AND, ironically, "moving").
Such is the legacy of electrostatic potential covering DC to Gamma.

I was wondering about the latter as a possibility but couldn't find
the proper words. My interpretation is although the individual fields
may vary the total potential of the fields is constant. Is this
correct?

The difference between rods, number of rods, thickness of rods, and
mesh all speak to bandwidth. 2, 3, or 4 rods will not be remarkable.
16 rods will closely approximate a cone of sheet metal (as would a
grid of similar spacing). The same can be said of the
rod/rods/mesh/sheet in the upper section approximating a solid disk.

IIUC the current flows around the cone of a discone regardless of
solid, sheet or mesh construction. This appears to be contrary to the
quote above where current flows around each individual hole in the
mesh.


Well, language can be a barrier here when you say "around the cone."

I should have said the current flows around the cone parallel to its
base.

- more snippage -

I appreciate the clarifications and the links. It all helps to better
my knowledge and understanding of these topics. Thank you