Is the Fariday rotation effect incorporated in any way with the basic
NEC 2 and 4 computor design programs?
Art

On Feb 16, 10:55 pm, "art" wrote:
Is the Fariday rotation effect incorporated in any way with the basic
NEC 2 and 4 computor design programs?
Art

To the extent that it needs to be, yes.

Dan

On 17 feb, 04:55, "art" wrote:
Is the Fariday rotation effect incorporated in any way with the basic
NEC 2 and 4 computor design programs?
Art

Hello Art,

If you main the rotation of polarization of a wave during transit in a
DC magnetized medium, it is NO for NEC2. I do not believe that it is
modeled in NEC4.

Best Regards,

Wim

On 17 Feb, 07:58, "Wimpie" wrote:
On 17 feb, 04:55, "art" wrote:

Is the Fariday rotation effect incorporated in any way with the basic
NEC 2 and 4 computor design programs?
Art

Hello Art,

If you main the rotation of polarization of a wave during transit in a
DC magnetized medium, it is NO for NEC2. I do not believe that it is
modeled in NEC4.

Best Regards,

Wim

Yes that is what I mean noting that since it cannot be cancelled it
thus applies to a.c. as well. I somehow believe that it is connected
in some way to curl but ofcourse I have no reference to it. I have the
distinct feeling that it refers to the offset in polarity created by
the horizontal vector of curl which thus means for the case of
equilibrium polarity cannot be at right angles to the radiating
elements surface or parallel to it . I can duplicate this situation
using NEC based computor programs i.e. tilt, but I cannot find
reference to it anywhere. One must remember that Faradays work is now
quite old with respect to modern day advances but then we are now
getting a bit deep for most readers. My computor program predates NEC
4 !
Regards
Art

On 17 feb, 18:04, "art" wrote:
On 17 Feb, 07:58, "Wimpie" wrote:

On 17 feb, 04:55, "art" wrote:

Is the Fariday rotation effect incorporated in any way with the basic
NEC 2 and 4 computor design programs?
Art

Hello Art,

If you main the rotation of polarization of a wave during transit in a
DC magnetized medium, it is NO for NEC2. I do not believe that it is
modeled in NEC4.

Best Regards,

Wim

Yes that is what I mean noting that since it cannot be cancelled it
thus applies to a.c. as well. I somehow believe that it is connected
in some way to curl but ofcourse I have no reference to it. I have the
distinct feeling that it refers to the offset in polarity created by
the horizontal vector of curl which thus means for the case of
equilibrium polarity cannot be at right angles to the radiating
elements surface or parallel to it . I can duplicate this situation
using NEC based computor programs i.e. tilt, but I cannot find
reference to it anywhere. One must remember that Faradays work is now
quite old with respect to modern day advances but then we are now
getting a bit deep for most readers. My computor program predates NEC
4 !
Regards
Art

Hello Art,

As far as I know, all (maybe most) simulators for antennas assume the
media to be HILS, you can only enter properties like u', u'' or e'
e'', or in the form of absolute u or e together with a loss factor.

Probably there will be specialized simulators or custom programs
within research facilities that can handle non-HILS meda, but I think
that is of no use for antenna design for radiocommunication where the
interface is air.

Of course for propagation faraday rotation can be of importance.

If a metallic structure gives rise to polarization change, this will
be shown by antenna simulators that can visualize field properties
like E and H.

Best Regards,

Wim
PA3DJS

On 18 Feb, 08:20, "Wimpie" wrote:
On 17 feb, 18:04, "art" wrote:





On 17 Feb, 07:58, "Wimpie" wrote:

On 17 feb, 04:55, "art" wrote:

Is the Fariday rotation effect incorporated in any way with the basic
NEC 2 and 4 computor design programs?
Art

Hello Art,

If you main the rotation of polarization of a wave during transit in a
DC magnetized medium, it is NO for NEC2. I do not believe that it is
modeled in NEC4.

Best Regards,

Wim

Yes that is what I mean noting that since it cannot be cancelled it
thus applies to a.c. as well. I somehow believe that it is connected
in some way to curl but ofcourse I have no reference to it. I have the
distinct feeling that it refers to the offset in polarity created by
the horizontal vector of curl which thus means for the case of
equilibrium polarity cannot be at right angles to the radiating
elements surface or parallel to it . I can duplicate this situation
using NEC based computor programs i.e. tilt, but I cannot find
reference to it anywhere. One must remember that Faradays work is now
quite old with respect to modern day advances but then we are now
getting a bit deep for most readers. My computor program predates NEC
4 !
Regards
Art

Hello Art,

As far as I know, all (maybe most) simulators for antennas assume the
media to be HILS, you can only enter properties like u', u'' or e'
e'', or in the form of absolute u or e together with a loss factor.

Probably there will be specialized simulators or custom programs
within research facilities that can handle non-HILS meda, but I think
that is of no use for antenna design for radiocommunication where the
interface is air.

Of course for propagation faraday rotation can be of importance.

If a metallic structure gives rise to polarization change, this will
be shown by antenna simulators that can visualize field properties
like E and H.

Best Regards,

Wim
PA3DJS- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wimpie I do like your style of debate even where some statements
appear
lacking in thought. Back to the subject. I would agree that such
rotation if viable would appear in E H diagrams since Faradays
rotation is about equilibrium in relative cosmic terms. This now leads
to the main question of
radiation where the current distribution on a radiating member is
shown in a two dimensional form which by intuition states that the
direction of radiation is at right angles to the radiator but this
would only be true
when it is not time related. Even if it was time related the vectors
involved cannot produce a vector for the culmination of both vectors
that would point in a direction at right angles to the radiating
surface
( this is moving from cosmic relativity to local relativity if you
follow my point ) Thus intuitively maximum radiation cannot possibly
be at right angles to the radiator and also not, at right angles to
the earth unless compensating tilt is given to the radiator. To prove
this one can place a vertical radiator at right angles to the earths
surface and record the differences in radiation IN ALL POLARITIES at
every degree of tilt until equilibrium occurs ( this I have confirmed
by the use of a computor program that designs a vertical dipole where
all dimensions are variable at the beginning and where the computor
arrives at the point of equilibrium )
So in summation Faradays rotation is a subject of equilibrium and in
his case refers to cosmic and where "curl " is a derivative thereof
with respect to earth, which as you state will be shown in the E and H
vector format. Hopefully you can follow all that and prove it for
yourself with a vertical radiator design.
Best Regards
Art

"art" wrote
big snip
Wimpie I do like your style of debate even where some statements
appear lacking in thought.
big snip
Back to the subject. So in summation Faradays rotation is a subject of
equilibrium and in
his case refers to cosmic and where "curl " is a derivative thereof
with respect to earth, which as you state will be shown in the E and H
vector format. Hopefully you can follow all that and prove it for
yourself with a vertical radiator design.
Best Regards
Art

Art: I have been working on my closed_mindedness, and feel that I will
make
significant improvement if you will provide me with enough hard data to
build a version of your magnificent antenna.
1. Has a physical version of your antenna been constructed?
2. I have sworn off of EZNEC, so I would need a copy of your antenna
model, in any commercially available computor (sic) program format..
3. I have access to aluminum in plate, tube, or foil form. Would I need
anything else?
4. What would be the best way to feed the array, so as to prevent
intermodial
dirfraction?
5. I can mount the main elements on some Milford trunnions that I have saved
for just such a project. Do you think that bipolar status is attainable?

Glad to see you doing so well.

Mike W5CHR
Memphis