LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10   Report Post  
Old February 22nd 07, 11:47 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
art art is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,188
Default Gaussian antenna aunwin

On 22 Feb, 13:55, "art" wrote:
On 22 Feb, 13:05, "Frank's"
wrote:





"Richard Clark" wrote in message


.. .


On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 03:33:40 GMT, "Frank's"
wrote:


Gain at 10 deg. elevation -- 10.2 dBi


Gain at 10 deg. elevation -- 12.3 dBi


Hi Frank,


Consistent with past experience with Art's designs, I threw away
2/3rds of it (OK 2 wires) and got 3 dB more gain. Do we blame Gauss
for the original poor performance? Does this validate Art's concept
of static electromechanical waves?


Art, if this is a typo (electromechanical waves), then how many other
typos inhabit your descriptions that corrupt your truths that come out
so tarnished? If we have to sit through another rendition of Hearts
and Flowers about us kicking cripples, stealing from blind newsboys,
defrauding widows, and getting our rewards taken away from us in an
after-life; then maybe you should get a season ticket to the new
moderated group where those soap opera tunes can be sung in their
castrati choir.


73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC


Hi Richard, I was not really serious, but at least wanted to demonstrate
that a simple 2 element array outperformed the fictitious antenna which
must be machined to within +/- 1 micro-inch. I assume it is some kind
of joke, and particularly liked the description of orbiting helium nuclei;
also the presence of beta particles. The elements must be partially
radio-active.


73,


Frank (VE6CB)- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Frank, choose your friends! Alpha and Beta were the first two letters
of the alphabet, I do not wish to represent myself as a physicist. On
the multi decimal figures they are computor derived
and I do not feel it to be my place to manipulate figures. On the
ficticious three element beam it was clearly laid out as a sample that
in no way was an extension of a Yagi beamm where all elements were
resonant and not planar or parasitic in form.
Tt clearly laid out the polarity of the gains mentioned which by the
way you did not do. In fact I don't know what you did or where your
figures originated from. The sample beam was drawn up purely to
demonstrate the dexterity of positions plus the multi resonance and it
was accompanied by the process from whence the dimensions came from,
which this group in its entirety stated as implausable some weeks ago.
As an adder I gave swr curves together with gain curves to demonstrate
the absense of parasitics
which for a yagi demands choices of desirebles ( there is a whole
chaptor in the ARRL handbook about this problem.) As an aside I also
included in the array an element which was not only at an angle
relative to that around it but also of a length unrelated to a half
wave length. Now you obviously are not aware of the vagrances of
antennas otherwise you would not have replied like you did with an
example missing details of measurement, phase and to any point that
perhaps you were trying to make. I could have drawn a high gain
antenna of half the length of a yagi with the same gain but that would
have strayed from what I was trying to emphasise i.e. an advance in
science.. You are obviously out of touch with respect to antennas by
what you write
as are others who are declaring their lack of knoweledge by what they
say. What goes around comes around and you will notice that nobody has
faulted the theory espoused for the array other than your word of
ficticious which you never explained. Give me something for the record
please.Do you have a high school diploma?
Art
Art- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Frank, On the net iswa free book on waves and antennas by a professer
at Rutgers University In chapter 21 he plays with a clustr element
that first came about some 60 years ago.
In book the array was changed somewhat to provide an array from which
all the desirables could be determined. This 60 year old array was
solved in various ways but today even more than 60 yearsof existance
did anybody realize the connection to Gaussian law of statics when the
addition of time is added to the law. I am the first to make that
distinction from which a whole new antenna technology will arise. Now
you refer to Richard for some sort of support but he doesn't have a
docterate, he doesn't have a masters and he certainly does not have a
degree in engineering.
Now I know many men in San Fransisco do swear by him as would his
close friends would when he dons his meshnet tights and shows of his
degrees to them which is a 90 degree piroett in front of them
but the fact is that he did attend some university programs as a
guest since he is knoweledgable about Shakesapeare and dancing.Be
carefull of your choice of friends
Art



 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dipole Antenna {Doublet Aerial} make from Power "Zip Cord" or Speaker Wire and . . . More 'About' the Doublet Antenna RHF Shortwave 1 February 22nd 07 03:44 AM
The "Green" Antenna for AM/MW Radio Reception plus Shortwave Too ! RHF Shortwave 0 January 10th 07 01:21 PM
Why Tilt ? - The Terminated Tilted Folded Dipole (TTFD / T2FD) Antenna RHF Shortwave 2 April 18th 06 10:21 PM
Passive Repeater Bryan Martin Antenna 13 February 10th 06 02:03 PM
Grounding Steve Rabinowitz Shortwave 31 December 14th 05 05:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017