On Feb 24, 8:14*pm, Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:50:47 -0600, tom wrote:
Ok, revisiting things now that I have time, I discovered something,
which The Art may (ok, will) get off into an incomprehensible rant about..

This outrage is largely due in part to revealing an inferior design:

* * * * * * *Gain * * * F/B
Original * * 9.87 dBi * 7.84
Normalized *10.29 dBi * 8.58

I wonder whatever happened to the golden city shining on the top of
the hill that Art called "length efficiency?" *A back of the envelope
calculation of Art's 20M antenna reveals elements that are
conventional half wave. *This raises the more immediate
head-scratcher: whatever happened to the golden calf of his designs
being in equalithium?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard,
I am sharing results provided by computer optimizers where an array
must be in equilibrium. I am not party to how these programs were
generated or how closely they adhere to maxwells equations.If they
provide results that are different then that seller has to answer for
it.
Obviously clever people such as yourself will guide hams on the
correct path to follow
as well as to explain why Maxwells equations do not favor the yagi.
Hopefully you will supply technical details and not just wordy fluff.
I would point out that Tom provided a planar form, which you copied,
for a different frequency to the one that I supplied which provided f/
b/r that greatly exceeded his design. If your idea is to be a pied
piper to lead ham radio away from
examining change then such tactics will certainly do the job. But
first to justify your dreams as a leader you have to provide reasons
that make optimizer programs suspect.
A point in your favor would be that Roy declares that his optimizer do
NOT supply the results that others do so that experts such as you can
direct your talents where they would be more profitable. Since you are
not wired the same as I am I will not respond to you any more so that
guilt by association may not be applied. But I will mention to all
that you are in total disagreement with the association of a static
field being made dynamic which is a staple in physics around which
this discussion rests upon. Nobody, nobody, has come forward to
provide academic reasons why this staple should not be held to or why
people such as you should trash pursuit of that what I disclose. What
I have provided is that computer programs side lines yagis in favor of
arrays where elements are not parallel but all are resonant and where
the array as a whole is in equilibrium. They do this because Maxwell
supports the physics staple I proffer which you declare as NOT being
correct but without supporting data other than you said so.