|
A chance to argue about something different
Hi members of the antenna group,
Seems like the group is getting bogged down into sniping, here another chance to get back to antennas. I tried with another post yesterday but the choice of attention is still to those who want to snipe. With a driven element you have two circular radiation patterns at each section. Before you start to focus a beam for gain by adding parassitic elements you must first collect maximuml radiation to the desired direction. Sooooooooooooo............................ with these two circular patterns from the driven element you fold the pattern in the middle so that both patterns are in the same direction and the same shape i.e a circle that expands to a larger circle but holding on to a particular half power beam width which is an included angle. So when we start to add parassitics we are able to deal with this CIRCLE of radiation which then focusses by squeezing of the pattern since it cannot add to the initial pattern. I think the above clearly shows that for recovering of radiation from the rear direction in any form must produce a radiation pattern to the front by retaining a circular pattern. Now I have achieved such a transformation of a driven element with a reflector to produce an initial circular pattern via computor analysis which agrees in my mind that rear radiation does nothing fto add to the forward radiation lobe. This is contrary to the thinking of some pseudo experts on this newsgroup. So what is really happening, take a shot at it even if you do not consider your self an expert since we want your participation as well as the experts who will probably hang back to be guided by what others have to say. Now we can ignore this posting since it is about antennas. We can use a sniping tactic by changing the subject to a direction that you want . You can resort to saying I don't understand the question.. We can debate alternative arguments where you tend to disagree and show why e.t.c . So what do you want for this newsgroup? ( Are you listening Walt) An augument, a debate as to why a radiation pattern changed from circucular or do you prefer to extend the threads from slow code and others of his type who are not here to talk about antennas. Or should we await a similar question to get back on track from one of the old members of this newsgroup who are unhappy with the state of things?. Your choice guys ! Are you a follower or a leader? Regards Art |
A chance to argue about something different
On 20 Oct 2006 13:30:41 -0700, "art" wrote:
Seems like the group is getting bogged down into sniping, here another chance .... This is contrary to the thinking of some pseudo experts on this newsgroup. so it would seem. |
A chance to argue about something different
you contradict yourself, and don't understand the problem.... there, i said
it. "art" wrote in message oups.com... With a driven element you have two circular radiation patterns at each section. no you don't. a single dipole element like a common driven element all by itself in free space has a doughnut shaped pattern in 3 dimensions. the typical cross section you see in an azmuth slice is only part of the story... but continue... Before you start to focus a beam for gain by adding parassitic elements you must first collect maximuml radiation to the desired direction. Sooooooooooooo............................ with these two circular patterns from the driven element you fold the pattern in the middle so that both patterns are in the same direction and the same shape i.e a circle that expands to a larger circle but holding on to a particular half power beam width which is an included angle. So when we start to add parassitics we are able to deal with this CIRCLE of radiation which then focusses by squeezing of the pattern since it cannot add to the initial pattern. just how do you plan on doing this?? you can't take and just fold a field around??? I think the above clearly shows that for recovering of radiation from the rear direction in any form must produce a radiation pattern to the front by retaining a circular pattern. Now I have achieved such a transformation of a driven element with a reflector to produce an initial circular pattern via computor analysis which agrees in my mind that rear radiation does nothing fto add to the forward radiation lobe. but you said above that you would do this before adding parasitic elements. what do you think a 'reflector' is?? wait, i can answer that, its a parasitic element! weather it agrees with your mind or not doesn't matter... it has to be physically realizable. so what is this magic configuration that gives 100% folding of the lobes over themselves?? and what happens in the 3rd dimension? Now we can ignore this posting since it is about antennas. your first idea is the best, so i snipped the rest. |
A chance to argue about something different
Dave wrote: you contradict yourself, and don't understand the problem.... there, i said it. "art" wrote in message oups.com... With a driven element you have two circular radiation patterns at each section. no you don't. a single dipole element like a common driven element all by itself in free space has a doughnut shaped pattern in 3 dimensions. the typical cross section you see in an azmuth slice is only part of the story... but continue... Correct David, I don't know who you are but you are quite correct in stating that the question must revolve around an array in space. Now that clarity is established hopefully the debate will remain professional without sniping Best regards Art SNIP |
A chance to argue about something different
art wrote: Now that clarity is established hopefully the debate will remain professional without sniping Best regards Art Sniping is fun when done under the clinical supervision of a doktor. They even have sniping services on the web now that will do the sniping for you. But I've been a fairly successful sniper just using the old fashioned manual method of waiting until about 3 seconds before the auction ends, and firing away with my best shot. I got a vintage fender reverb amp for $400 using my sniping techniques. Check the usual pricing scheme for those... And mine was recapped and "blackfaced"to boot. I've been the victim of sniping myself. It can happen to anyone. I bid on some real estate in Arkansas a couple of weeks ago, and some other sniper bit me in the heiney. But I keep a stiff upper lip through it all, and call it another day, another $2.41.. As far as your antenna, I don't have a clue. We had a quiver in the force recently, and I've forgotten everything about antennas. I'm thinking about taking up barefoot water skiing or something like that to fill my time. MK |
A chance to argue about something different
art wrote: Now that clarity is established hopefully the debate will remain professional without sniping Best regards Art Sniping is fun when done under the clinical supervision of a doktor. They even have sniping services on the web now that will do the sniping for you. But I've been a fairly successful sniper just using the old fashioned manual method of waiting until about 3 seconds before the auction ends, and firing away with my best shot. I got a vintage fender super reverb amp for $400 using my sniping techniques. Check the usual pricing scheme for those... And mine was recapped and "blackfaced"to boot. I've been the victim of sniping myself. It can happen to anyone. I bid on some real estate in Arkansas a couple of weeks ago, and some other sniper bit me in the heiney. But I keep a stiff upper lip through it all, and call it another day, another $2.41.. As far as your antenna, I don't have a clue. We had a quiver in the force recently, and I've forgotten everything about antennas. I'm thinking about taking up barefoot water skiing or something like that to fill my time. MK |
A chance to argue about something different
|
A chance to argue about something different
Ummm, the OP is a sly fox....
First of all when you take the two "dipole circles" and fold it around what you have is a feed line - instantaneous currents are 180 degrees phase relation at any point - and no radiation... Plus you have an open circuit at the far end which means - Reflections, eh! Taaa ... denny / k8do |
A chance to argue about something different
Interesting rhythmic -um- device which seems to counterpoint the surrealism of the underlying metaphor... of the designer's compassionate soul which strives through... through... the medium of the Æther's structure to sublimate this transaction and come to terms with the fundamental dichotomy of the antenna. One is left with the profound and vivid insight into... into... whatever it was about! [This allusion is lifted from one of the greatest of English works of Radio/TV/Literature/Computer Game/Movies: "H²G²." Others may recognize Arthur Dent's appreciation for Vogon poetry which most of Art's (not Dent) postings so amazingly mimic.] Glad you added that last paragraph...thought I was reading a psychotic break in real time. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:14 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com