"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 5 Feb, 13:09, "art" wrote:
On 3 Feb, 19:51, "Ralph Mowery" wrote:

Has anyone modeled what happens to the signal of a triband 3 element
antenna
that has one or more of the elements that has slipped on the boom say
10 or
20 deg ?

Also saw in an old magazine an antenna for 2 meters that had each
element
offset by about 5 or 10 deg around the boom to produce circular
polarization. Will this actually work or is it wishful thinking ?

Ralph you are getting very close to reality.If all your elements are
close to individual
resonance then slippage upto 30 degrees will be to your advantage. At
the same
time your total gain will consist of the addition of all other
polarizations including circular

With respect to the 2 meter antenna, if I remember correctly the
successive angles must
be between around 20 to 30 degrees and none of the elements will
measure a half wave
length since they must all be resonant despite the coupling effects
which adds to
complications in manufacture.
Still if you feed one element at a time you can eventually get to
Eldorado, if not then
get in touch with your requirements and I will provide the dimensions
and if you have
any doubt you can use your own program to check its validity.
Have fun
Art

No I am not saring that! What I am saying is that an anterna can
radiate
in many ways at the same time. One or all of them can combine or
cancel
to provide a max radiation field. Why I mentioned that was if a
radiator was
horizontal which hams would normally favour would favour horizontal
polarization and other polarizations would suffer.
If the array did not favour a particular polarization by being placed
at an
angle to the surface of the earth you would hear signals at different
distances
because of various polarization signals one can receive. In other
words your
antenna covers a larger land area than say a horizontal antenna
alone.
This could well be why a Yagi appears not to hear as well as a quad
which hears a variety of signals from different distances but of
course
many would argue the validity of that statement just for aurguments
sake
alone.!
The Gaussian clustered arrays that I talk about are radiating arrays
of arbitary
positions and angles relative to one another such that they are
suitable for use
at any polarization required for advantage. Also because all elrments
are resonant
interchange of driven elements can be attained to porvide alternate
polarizations
a challenge that I understand Yuri is presently pursuing for various
reasons tho
I understand it is mainly to combat fading of signals, but he can
explain for himself..
Art


Polarity diversity is nothing new Art, the way you are trying to achive it,
if that is what your guassian cluster is all about is the wrong way to go
about it. First time you have even come close to describing what you are
doing.

On 9 Feb, 00:27, "Jimmie D" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...





On 5 Feb, 13:09, "art" wrote:
On 3 Feb, 19:51, "Ralph Mowery" wrote:

Has anyone modeled what happens to the signal of a triband 3 element
antenna
that has one or more of the elements that has slipped on the boom say
10 or
20 deg ?

Also saw in an old magazine an antenna for 2 meters that had each
element
offset by about 5 or 10 deg around the boom to produce circular
polarization. Will this actually work or is it wishful thinking ?

Ralph you are getting very close to reality.If all your elements are
close to individual
resonance then slippage upto 30 degrees will be to your advantage. At
the same
time your total gain will consist of the addition of all other
polarizations including circular

With respect to the 2 meter antenna, if I remember correctly the
successive angles must
be between around 20 to 30 degrees and none of the elements will
measure a half wave
length since they must all be resonant despite the coupling effects
which adds to
complications in manufacture.
Still if you feed one element at a time you can eventually get to
Eldorado, if not then
get in touch with your requirements and I will provide the dimensions
and if you have
any doubt you can use your own program to check its validity.
Have fun
Art

No I am not saring that! What I am saying is that an anterna can
radiate
in many ways at the same time. One or all of them can combine or
cancel
to provide a max radiation field. Why I mentioned that was if a
radiator was
horizontal which hams would normally favour would favour horizontal
polarization and other polarizations would suffer.
If the array did not favour a particular polarization by being placed
at an
angle to the surface of the earth you would hear signals at different
distances
because of various polarization signals one can receive. In other
words your
antenna covers a larger land area than say a horizontal antenna
alone.
This could well be why a Yagi appears not to hear as well as a quad
which hears a variety of signals from different distances but of
course
many would argue the validity of that statement just for aurguments
sake
alone.!
The Gaussian clustered arrays that I talk about are radiating arrays
of arbitary
positions and angles relative to one another such that they are
suitable for use
at any polarization required for advantage. Also because all elrments
are resonant
interchange of driven elements can be attained to porvide alternate
polarizations
a challenge that I understand Yuri is presently pursuing for various
reasons tho
I understand it is mainly to combat fading of signals, but he can
explain for himself..
Art

Polarity diversity is nothing new Art
,
I didn't sar it was

the way you are trying to achive it

I am not trying it is automatic because of the design,

if that is what your guassian cluster is all about is the wrong way to go
about it. First time you have even come close to describing what you are
doing.-


I have stated what it is all about and was quoted as being a
blithering idiot.
The group as a whole is not ready to accept anything that is not
written in
any book. Humans by their very nature are unwilling to accept change
so the
generation that comes along to suck up all that is written is the one
that
advances in science.
Art

Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Feb 9, 10:41 am, "art" wrote:
On 9 Feb, 00:27, "Jimmie D" wrote:


The group as a whole is not ready to accept anything that is not
written in
any book. Humans by their very nature are unwilling to accept change
so the
generation that comes along to suck up all that is written is the one
that
advances in science.
Art


I could care less about books, although I do have quite a few.
I'm more convinced when I actually see something work.
If you are convinced this theory of yours has merit, why
can't you build one of the things and test it?
All this gaussian jibber jabber doesn't mean squat if you can't
build , test, and demonstrate one in the real world.
I read books, but I also usually test things in the real world to
verify the info is correct. Trust me, not much of what is in books
is wrong. Some is, but it's fairly rare overall.
If I were to come up with some new design, I would have built,
tested, and compared, before I even made any announcement
about the theory.
I get the impression that you cook up all these ideas, but
rarely actually test them in the real world.
That's no way to live, if you don't want the negative flak.
MK

On 9 Feb, 09:48, wrote:
On Feb 9, 10:41 am, "art" wrote:

On 9 Feb, 00:27, "Jimmie D" wrote:
The group as a whole is not ready to accept anything that is not
written in
any book. Humans by their very nature are unwilling to accept change
so the
generation that comes along to suck up all that is written is the one
that
advances in science.
Art

I could care less about books, although I do have quite a few.
I'm more convinced when I actually see something work.
If you are convinced this theory of yours has merit, why
can't you build one of the things and test it?
All this gaussian jibber jabber doesn't mean squat if you can't
build , test, and demonstrate one in the real world.
I read books, but I also usually test things in the real world to
verify the info is correct. Trust me, not much of what is in books
is wrong. Some is, but it's fairly rare overall.
If I were to come up with some new design, I would have built,
tested, and compared, before I even made any announcement
about the theory.
I get the impression that you cook up all these ideas, but
rarely actually test them in the real world.
That's no way to live, if you don't want the negative flak.
MK

It doesn't really matter what the amateur world thinks of it,
I have done my bit in sharing with the ham community
and they have shown me their level of competance and civility.
in return
So I can now move on satrsfied that I truly tried and was rejected
and present it to academia where there are many qualified who
will judge in a academic manner I think then you will regret the
position you have taken as others will.
It has already been examined by a qualified engineer in the subject
and confirmed that the underlying theme as being valid using other
measurement systems which I personaly am not privy to.
So I feel confident that when I put a page on the web next week
tho it will be in rough laymans terms of someone not skilled in the
arts there will be many that will push that sort of thing aside and
delve a bit deeper to get at the essence of what I present.
With that said I will now leave this parrticular thread as it is
now totally off topic.
Art

On Feb 9, 4:19 pm, "art" wrote:


It doesn't really matter what the amateur world thinks of it,
I have done my bit in sharing with the ham community
and they have shown me their level of competance and civility.

As far as I know, we haven't seen anything yet except a few theories.
Where's the beef?

in return
So I can now move on satrsfied that I truly tried and was rejected
and present it to academia where there are many qualified who
will judge in a academic manner I think then you will regret the
position you have taken as others will.

No, I personally could care less. I have no use for the design you
propose,
assuming a chance that it actually might work..
Academia? I hope you aren't planning on flying to the Boston area.
I bet that would hinder your case, rather than help.

It has already been examined by a qualified engineer in the subject
and confirmed that the underlying theme as being valid using other
measurement systems which I personaly am not privy to.

There are qualified engineers here. Other measurement systems?
Not privy? Hummmm....

So I feel confident that when I put a page on the web next week
tho it will be in rough laymans terms of someone not skilled in the
arts there will be many that will push that sort of thing aside and
delve a bit deeper to get at the essence of what I present.

Push what sort of thing behind? I hope it isn't too heavy..

With that said I will now leave this parrticular thread as it is
now totally off topic.

Well, ok then.
MK