On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:26:23 GMT, Richard Clark wrote:


This sucker's signal dives right into the ground like a plow.
Obviously the eh antenna suffers a misspelling, it should be POS.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard, does POS mean positive, or is it what gets stuffed into the hole plowed
by the signal?

Walter Maxwell wrote:

SNIP

Richard, does POS mean positive, or is it what gets stuffed into the hole plowed
by the signal?

I think it's related to fertilizer!

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:17:53 GMT, Dave Shrader
wrote:

Walter Maxwell wrote:

SNIP

Richard, does POS mean positive, or is it what gets stuffed into the hole plowed
by the signal?

I think it's related to fertilizer!

Dave, I think it means pile o something or other, can't think of what it is
right now.

Walt

Walter,
Since you have had a lot of success with publicly dancing on the EH grave
with this thread .could you point out any facets on the experimenation made
that could possibly be useful for further study, maybe something in the
order of radiation efficiency per unit length or something else that you may
have spotted ?
I have not got involved with the EH antenna mechanics but I would hate to
see something of interest covered purely for the sake of frivility at an
experimentors expence.
Regards
Art Unwin


"Walter Maxwell" wrote in message
...
Happy New Year to you, too, Rick.

To anyone who believes the W5QJR EH concept is valid.

I just now received a request from Rick Lutzinger, KD6ZR, asking for my
opinion
on the validity of the EH concept W5QJR touts as his invention in his
website at
www.eh-antenna.com.

I went back and reviewed the posts on this thread posted during the last
week of
September 2003. Surprisingly, I didn't find anyone who disagreed with the
concept. All I found there were disgreements with the claims for gain and
realistic claims that this antenna could not even radiate as well as a
conventional antenna. With this I agree.

The following text contains my reply to Rick:

Hi Rick,

I didn't have the opportunity to refer to Hart's fiasco until day before
yesterday. He appears to still be in the business of publishing proofs of
his limited knowledge of antenna and transmission line principles.
Unfortunately, he appears to believe he's found something new in his 'EH'
concept. On the contrary, 'his' antenna still performs as a Hertz, and his
limited knowledge has misled him believe he has something different. So
let's examine the situation.

Let's begin with a traditional resonant 1/4 wave vertical antenna over
perfect ground fed with a 50-ohm coax matched to a source delivering all
of
its available power--signifying a conjugate match. Now let's add some
inductive reactance between the coax and the antenna. There is no longer a
conjugate match, the current lags the voltage, the power factor is no
longer
100%, and the delivery of power is reduced proportionately. If we continue
to increase the inductance until the current lags voltage by 90 degrees
the
power factor is zero, because cos 90 = 0. In this case the only power
delivered by the source is that dissipated in the inherent loss of the
inductance. The reactive power contained in the inductance is reflected
back
to the source resulting in a mismatch that prevents any further delivery
of
power other than that required to supply the power dissipated in the loss
resistance of the inductance. In this condition no power will be delivered
to the antenna.

However, if a capacitor is inserted in series with the inductor having the
same but negative value of reactance as the inductor, we know that the
total
reactance now is zero, the conjugate match is restored, and the power
delivery returns to normal.

On the other hand, Hart is applying the 90-degree phase lag to a very
short
antenna, whose input impedance is capacitive. As the series inductance is
increased to where its reactance equals the negative reactance of the
antenna capacitance, we have the conventional loading and matching of an
antenna that is shorter than that of resonance.

Now if Hart is able to obtain an input to the antenna that approaches an
impedance match allowing power to be delivered into the antenna, the
capacitive reactance of his short antenna is simply compensating for the
series inductance he believes produces current that lags voltage by 90
degrees. Tain't so. He is simply feeding a traditionally matched short
Hertzian antenna. Further, voltage applied to Hart's 'EH' antenna results
in
antenna current flowing in exactly the same manner as in any antenna, and
the E and H fields are formed and are related to each other in the same
chronological manner as in any antenna. The natural laws of
electromagnetic
theory govern the field development and there is nothing anyone can do to
violate those laws developed by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1800s--they
have been
proven immutable for more than 120 years.

So how come the respondents rave about how terrific their 'EH' antennas
work? It's only because they fail to understand what is really
happening--there is no change in the chronological relationship between
the E
and H fields, as Hart has misled them to believe, they are simply using a
shortened loaded antenna in the traditional manner.

Hope you find this of value, Rick

73, Walt

PS--Please note in the References section of Reflections that an asterisk
preceding a name indicates that that reference contains erroneous and
misleading information. Now take a peek at my Reference 100. The material
in
that reference proves that that writer even then didn't didn't have a clue
concerning transmission line theory. Note also the date: March
1969--things
don't seem to change very much.

Walt Maxwell, W2DU

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:05:01 GMT, " Art Unwin KB9MZ"
wrote:

Walter,
Since you have had a lot of success with publicly dancing on the EH grave
with this thread .could you point out any facets on the experimenation made
that could possibly be useful for further study, maybe something in the
order of radiation efficiency per unit length or something else that you may
have spotted ?
I have not got involved with the EH antenna mechanics but I would hate to
see something of interest covered purely for the sake of frivility at an
experimentors expence.
Regards
Art Unwin


"Walter Maxwell" wrote in message
.. .
Happy New Year to you, too, Rick.

To anyone who believes the W5QJR EH concept is valid.

I just now received a request from Rick Lutzinger, KD6ZR, asking for my
opinion
on the validity of the EH concept W5QJR touts as his invention in his
website at
www.eh-antenna.com.

Thanks for asking, Art, but no, I can't come up with anything new in this area.
However, if you're looking for some huffaw size grins I suggest you look at the
website shown directly above. It has several categories in a pull-to-the-right
menu for their selection. One category you'll like is 'Article', but I believe
the one with the huffaws is the 'EH Definition'.

On the other hand, the report of the measurements taken by the consulting firm
is well done and useful, but of course it's not data measured on an EH antenna,
because such an antenna doesn't exist.

I know this hasn't helped, Art, but it's the best I can do under the
circumstances.

Walt