Jim Kelley wrote:
And so what you're saying is that by convention RF current flows "in" to
one end, and then "out" of the other?

Yes, that's the DC convention adopted to AC. Just be sure to put a
dot on the input side so everyone will know it's the input reference. :-)
That convention also applies to baluns and transformers.

I must admit I don't like the sound of that one bit. Sounds like you're
describing the direction a "wave" is "traveling", when we know that the
"wave" is really just "standing" there. :-)

I didn't invent the 'AC current flowing away from the source' convention
but most of the tools and concepts that I was taught assume such. It
would be extremely difficult to introduce a new and different convention.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Tdonaly wrote:

The real test will be when someone tries to make a new, improved
antenna based on the belief that the current taper on the loading coil
of a physically short antenna makes a tinker's damn worth of difference
in the far field radiation of said antenna.

That's right. Cavemen didn't need to understand fire in order to make
fire. They knew everything they needed to know about it. In fact, fire
has not changed one iota with the advent of modern science.

Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:
And so what you're saying is that by convention RF current flows "in" to
one end, and then "out" of the other?

Yes, that's the DC convention adopted to AC. Just be sure to put a
dot on the input side so everyone will know it's the input reference. :-)
That convention also applies to baluns and transformers.

The dot indicates phase polarity.

I must admit I don't like the sound of that one bit. Sounds like you're
describing the direction a "wave" is "traveling", when we know that the
"wave" is really just "standing" there. :-)

I didn't invent the 'AC current flowing away from the source' convention
but most of the tools and concepts that I was taught assume such.

Maybe they taught this "convention" in grade school back in the
'40's? I don't know what application it might have here. Maybe you
could point to somewhere in 95-1 where they make use of this
"convention". Or indicate how it might apply to a coil having
alternating current going "in" from both ends.

73, Jim AC6XG

Tdonaly wrote:
Cecil doesn't actually have to measure anything, since he's already convinced
he's right because his arguments agree with the theory he made up in his head.

Forgot to post the accompanying graphic which is:

http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/sqcoil.gif

How do you explain that current distribution with current minimum at
the bottom of the coil and current maximum at the top of the coil?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Jim Kelley wrote:
The dot indicates phase polarity.

A necessity when using DC models for AC circuits. Hint: Balanced
AC has no objective fixed polarity. It is all subjective. (Never
mind that current holes flow out of the '+' terminal of a battery. :-)

Maybe they taught this "convention" in grade school back in the
'40's? I don't know what application it might have here. Maybe you
could point to somewhere in 95-1 where they make use of this
"convention". Or indicate how it might apply to a coil having
alternating current going "in" from both ends.

If you want to see current flowing out of both ends of a coil at the
same time just run http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/sqcoil.ez at 29 MHz.

Current into the bottom of the coil has a phase angle of -174 degrees,
i.e. referenced to the source, it is flowing toward the source. How
could it be otherwise? That point is ~1/2WL away from the source.

Current out of the top of the coil has a phase angle of -6 degrees,
i.e. referenced to the source, it is flowing away from the source.
How could it be otherwise? That point is ~1WL away from the source.

If you play with the parameters, I'm sure you can shift that -174
degrees to -180 degrees and that -6 degrees to zero degrees.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil,

I was just trying to help keep you from sounding like an idiot.

Never mind. I'll stop.

Jim

Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:
The dot indicates phase polarity.

A necessity when using DC models for AC circuits. Hint: Balanced
AC has no objective fixed polarity. It is all subjective. (Never
mind that current holes flow out of the '+' terminal of a battery. :-)

Maybe they taught this "convention" in grade school back in the
'40's? I don't know what application it might have here. Maybe you
could point to somewhere in 95-1 where they make use of this
"convention". Or indicate how it might apply to a coil having
alternating current going "in" from both ends.

If you want to see current flowing out of both ends of a coil at the
same time just run http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/sqcoil.ez at 29 MHz.

Current into the bottom of the coil has a phase angle of -174 degrees,
i.e. referenced to the source, it is flowing toward the source. How
could it be otherwise? That point is ~1/2WL away from the source.

Current out of the top of the coil has a phase angle of -6 degrees,
i.e. referenced to the source, it is flowing away from the source.
How could it be otherwise? That point is ~1WL away from the source.

If you play with the parameters, I'm sure you can shift that -174
degrees to -180 degrees and that -6 degrees to zero degrees.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil wrote,

Tdonaly wrote:
Cecil doesn't actually have to measure anything, since he's already
convinced
he's right because his arguments agree with the theory he made up in his
head.

Forgot to post the accompanying graphic which is:

http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/sqcoil.gif

How do you explain that current distribution with current minimum at
the bottom of the coil and current maximum at the top of the coil?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


That's a neat picture, Cecil. How did you make the picture of the coil?
Of course, you can do the same thing with a coil, *or a capacitor* and a
couple of identical tank circuits. Actually, why make them either in or
out of phase? That's boring. You can make the phase across the
inductor/capacitor
any value you want between 180 and minus 180 just by varying the
frequency. Check out the currents in the tank circuits when they're 90
degrees out of phase with one another.
The length of a capacitor is very small, Cecil. How do expect something that

small to be able to change the current between two tank circuits 180 degrees?
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 13:28:38 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

the far field radiation is irrelevant to
[renders]
the argument over current through a
loading coil
[a ****-ant argument]

Cecil
Seems like the model is lacking in all the details
and frankly I feel I am looking at an intentianal sham for some reason
For instance you do not show coupling to ground which is why I am suspicious
since resonance is unavoidably affected by nearby objects as well as ground
I f you drew your model the same way you portray
your G5RV or Zepp type dipole to accomodate
the loss of coupling to ground I would feel a lot better.
You also have not specified a a frequency of use that
is also conspiciuos now I have been moved to a suspicious aproach especially
when you interchange wavelength and size of inductance at the same time
ignoring the coupling effects of said items which affect phase change..Plus
ignors the radiation effect even tho it may be self cancelling since you
show it as zero length !
Methinks I have to study the model more for a troubling omission like the
addition of a inductance that is dimensionless and large compared to a model
that ignores factors such as coupling.and the like.
No disrespect intended
Regards
Art
Art

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Tdonaly wrote:
Mark wrote in reply to Cecil,
I know you have said it multiple times, but so far I don't recollect
anyone actually measuring a real world coil, and finding max current
at the top of the coil. That is what is bothering me. MK

Cecil doesn't actually have to measure anything, since he's already
convinced
he's right because his arguments agree with the theory he made up in his
head.

Well, just so you guys can understand what I am talking about, here is
an EZNEC file that clearly demonstrates low current at the bottom of
the coil and high current at the top of the coil.

http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/sqcoil.ez

The real test will be when someone tries to make a new, improved
antenna based on the belief that the current taper on the loading coil
of a physically short antenna makes a tinker's damn worth of difference
in the far field radiation of said antenna.

Nice try, but that's just a copout diversion because the far field
radiation is irrelevant to the argument over current through a
loading coil.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Jim Kelley wrote:
I was just trying to help keep you from sounding like an idiot.

The math model seduction is apparently worse than I thought.
If you are talking about my assertion that phase and direction of
current flow are related, I suggest you demonstrate 0+j0.5 amps of
current and tell us which of the two possible directions in a
transmission line that imaginary current is flowing.

So you disagree that 1 amp at 180 degrees is flowing in the opposite
direction to 1 amp at zero degrees? If not, why do you disagree that
1 amp at 170 degrees is flowing in the opposite direction of 1 amp
at 10 degrees? The direction of current flow is the cosine of the
phase angle.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----