|
Why?
On 1 Apr, 14:37, "Jimmie D" wrote:
"art" wrote in message oups.com... On 27 Mar, 15:12, (Richard Harrison) wrote: Art wrote: "I have his (Kraus`) second edition (Antennas) and I find no mention of radiation from the beginning where current is applied onward." I think I have that edition too. If you review the chapter on "Point Sources" you`ll find: power patterns, a power theorem and its application to isotropic sources, rediation intensity, source with hemispheric power pattern, unidirectional cosine power pattern, etc., etc.. The new, now available 3rd ed. of "Antennas" by Kraus, Marhefka, and a host of others is greatly expanded and improved. It is worth the investment. Being uncertain of what Art really wants, doesn`t stop me from advising him to start by having a look at the famous Sommerfeld formula on page 804 of Terman`s 1955 opus. It predicts 1 kilowatt will produce 186 mv per m at a distance of 1 mile from a short vertical transmitting antenna given a certain ground conductivity and other conditions. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Richard, I have lots of books but as yet have not found the answer even tho many have posted none appear to really have an answer other than to throw stones. You apparently have found the answer! Could you quote from the books that you are refering to the angle of radiation relative to the radiator, thats it ? If you can't understand that then relay to me the angle of a radiation front relative to a radiator, I'm sure some other people are interested in what you found. Even better, let me know the TOA of a dipole in free space and how much it varies to that of the same dipole over a perfect ground. Use a computor program if you like, anything that sheds light on the matter . The books say that a horizontal "v" antenna should be tipped for max gain, doesn't that raise your interest about the reasoning and mathematics behind this? Jimmie D asked me to state this angle but I have only a expensive computor program that doesn't give the math with the answer. Please read off the angle and the specifics so we all can move on, I don't want a 160 thread postings some thrust upon Walt Art The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jimmie, You are way to quick with your answers which means you are not commited to follow thru in serious thinking. There is a perfectly logical reason for it if you are familiar with the study of waves and fields in electro magnetics.(grin) And there are a couple of people that stand above all others that will possibly provide as to why it is logical. Stand by quietly to listen and learn,you don't have to post if you have nothing to contribute! Read what Richard Harrison has kindly provided and use that as a solid base to think about I have worked very hard to get to this particular point in a thread so as to cut of diversionary talk at the outset. We have an observation, now we need the explanation............Should be a very short thread if we only count contributors with possible explanations as to what has been observed. I'll leave it to others to discern who are the real educated contributors and who are the lemmings. Regards Art |
Why?
On 31 Mar, 14:36, Walter Maxwell wrote:
On 27 Mar 2007 16:39:52 -0700, "art" wrote: On 27 Mar, 15:12, (Richard Harrison) wrote: Art wrote: "I have his (Kraus`) second edition (Antennas) and I find no mention of radiation from the beginning where current is applied onward." I think I have that edition too. If you review the chapter on "Point Sources" you`ll find: power patterns, a power theorem and its application to isotropic sources, rediation intensity, source with hemispheric power pattern, unidirectional cosine power pattern, etc., etc.. The new, now available 3rd ed. of "Antennas" by Kraus, Marhefka, and a host of others is greatly expanded and improved. It is worth the investment. Being uncertain of what Art really wants, doesn`t stop me from advising him to start by having a look at the famous Sommerfeld formula on page 804 of Terman`s 1955 opus. It predicts 1 kilowatt will produce 186 mv per m at a distance of 1 mile from a short vertical transmitting antenna given a certain ground conductivity and other conditions. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Richard, I have lots of books but as yet have not found the answer even tho many have posted none appear to really have an answer other than to throw stones. You apparently have found the answer! Could you quote from the books that you are refering to the angle of radiation relative to the radiator, thats it ? If you can't understand that then relay to me the angle of a radiation front relative to a radiator, I'm sure some other people are interested in what you found. Even better, let me know the TOA of a dipole in free space and how much it varies to that of the same dipole over a perfect ground. Use a computor program if you like, anything that sheds light on the matter . The books say that a horizontal "v" antenna should be tipped for max gain, doesn't that raise your interest about the reasoning and mathematics behind this? Jimmie D asked me to state this angle but I have only a expensive computor program that doesn't give the math with the answer. Please read off the angle and the specifics so we all can move on, I don't want a 160 thread postings some thrust upon Walt Art The take-off angle of a dipole in free space? The angle with respect to what? Walt, W2DU- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Perhaps Walter you are really serious with the above question!!!!!! You have two reference planes, the radiator and the plane of maximum gain(ie. for vertical polarization) Therefor 90 degrees minus the angle between both planes equal "take off angle". Regards Art |
Why?
art wrote:
On 31 Mar, 14:36, Walter Maxwell wrote: On 27 Mar 2007 16:39:52 -0700, "art" wrote: On 27 Mar, 15:12, (Richard Harrison) wrote: Art wrote: "I have his (Kraus`) second edition (Antennas) and I find no mention of radiation from the beginning where current is applied onward." I think I have that edition too. If you review the chapter on "Point Sources" you`ll find: power patterns, a power theorem and its application to isotropic sources, rediation intensity, source with hemispheric power pattern, unidirectional cosine power pattern, etc., etc.. The new, now available 3rd ed. of "Antennas" by Kraus, Marhefka, and a host of others is greatly expanded and improved. It is worth the investment. Being uncertain of what Art really wants, doesn`t stop me from advising him to start by having a look at the famous Sommerfeld formula on page 804 of Terman`s 1955 opus. It predicts 1 kilowatt will produce 186 mv per m at a distance of 1 mile from a short vertical transmitting antenna given a certain ground conductivity and other conditions. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Richard, I have lots of books but as yet have not found the answer even tho many have posted none appear to really have an answer other than to throw stones. You apparently have found the answer! Could you quote from the books that you are refering to the angle of radiation relative to the radiator, thats it ? If you can't understand that then relay to me the angle of a radiation front relative to a radiator, I'm sure some other people are interested in what you found. Even better, let me know the TOA of a dipole in free space and how much it varies to that of the same dipole over a perfect ground. Use a computor program if you like, anything that sheds light on the matter . The books say that a horizontal "v" antenna should be tipped for max gain, doesn't that raise your interest about the reasoning and mathematics behind this? Jimmie D asked me to state this angle but I have only a expensive computor program that doesn't give the math with the answer. Please read off the angle and the specifics so we all can move on, I don't want a 160 thread postings some thrust upon Walt Art The take-off angle of a dipole in free space? The angle with respect to what? Walt, W2DU- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Perhaps Walter you are really serious with the above question!!!!!! You have two reference planes, the radiator and the plane of maximum gain(ie. for vertical polarization) Therefor 90 degrees minus the angle between both planes equal "take off angle". Regards Art Of course he is serious. There are no planes in free space for a dipole. The dipole defines a line, not a plane. Since the pattern of a dipole in free space is a circle viewed from the end, and a cardioid from the side, there is no plane there either. You are plain confused about planes. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Why?
art wrote:
On 1 Apr, 14:37, "Jimmie D" wrote: "art" wrote in message snip prior babbling The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jimmie, You are way to quick with your answers which means you are not commited to follow thru in serious thinking. There is a perfectly logical reason for it Or, he knows what he is talking about and you are just babbling again. snip remaining babbling nonsense -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Why?
"art" wrote in message oups.com... On 1 Apr, 14:37, "Jimmie D" wrote: "art" wrote in message oups.com... On 27 Mar, 15:12, (Richard Harrison) wrote: Art wrote: "I have his (Kraus`) second edition (Antennas) and I find no mention of radiation from the beginning where current is applied onward." I think I have that edition too. If you review the chapter on "Point Sources" you`ll find: power patterns, a power theorem and its application to isotropic sources, rediation intensity, source with hemispheric power pattern, unidirectional cosine power pattern, etc., etc.. The new, now available 3rd ed. of "Antennas" by Kraus, Marhefka, and a host of others is greatly expanded and improved. It is worth the investment. Being uncertain of what Art really wants, doesn`t stop me from advising him to start by having a look at the famous Sommerfeld formula on page 804 of Terman`s 1955 opus. It predicts 1 kilowatt will produce 186 mv per m at a distance of 1 mile from a short vertical transmitting antenna given a certain ground conductivity and other conditions. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Richard, I have lots of books but as yet have not found the answer even tho many have posted none appear to really have an answer other than to throw stones. You apparently have found the answer! Could you quote from the books that you are refering to the angle of radiation relative to the radiator, thats it ? If you can't understand that then relay to me the angle of a radiation front relative to a radiator, I'm sure some other people are interested in what you found. Even better, let me know the TOA of a dipole in free space and how much it varies to that of the same dipole over a perfect ground. Use a computor program if you like, anything that sheds light on the matter . The books say that a horizontal "v" antenna should be tipped for max gain, doesn't that raise your interest about the reasoning and mathematics behind this? Jimmie D asked me to state this angle but I have only a expensive computor program that doesn't give the math with the answer. Please read off the angle and the specifics so we all can move on, I don't want a 160 thread postings some thrust upon Walt Art The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jimmie, You are way to quick with your answers which means you are not commited to follow thru in serious thinking. There is a perfectly logical reason for it if you are familiar with the study of waves and fields in electro magnetics.(grin) And there are a couple of people that stand above all others that will possibly provide as to why it is logical. Stand by quietly to listen and learn,you don't have to post if you have nothing to contribute! Read what Richard Harrison has kindly provided and use that as a solid base to think about I have worked very hard to get to this particular point in a thread so as to cut of diversionary talk at the outset. We have an observation, now we need the explanation............Should be a very short thread if we only count contributors with possible explanations as to what has been observed. I'll leave it to others to discern who are the real educated contributors and who are the lemmings. Regards Art Actually my short answers are short because they are to the point if I can find one in your ramblings.The point I made illustated an obvious fault and inconsistencey with your reasoning which you deflect with insults because you have no answers. I know what I had had no value to anyone else but since you were makeing an iirelevant connection between tilt angle of a V antenna and polarization I thought it may give you some pause for thought. Obviously a wasted effort on my part Jimmie |
Why?
On 1 Apr, 16:05, wrote:
art wrote: On 1 Apr, 14:37, "Jimmie D" wrote: "art" wrote in message snip prior babbling The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jimmie, You are way to quick with your answers which means you are not commited to follow thru in serious thinking. There is a perfectly logical reason for it Or, he knows what he is talking about and you are just babbling again. snip remaining babbling nonsense -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Jim Pennino, it was only a short time ago that you showed your ignorance of electrical laws (gaussian) by calling it nonsense and babling. Now you are attempting to concilidate your position of ignorance, and doing quite well at it I might add. I suggest you accept the same advice I gave Jimmie if you want to avoid being blown away by electric laws once again. Art |
Why?
On 1 Apr, 16:23, "Jimmie D" wrote:
"art" wrote in message oups.com... On 1 Apr, 14:37, "Jimmie D" wrote: "art" wrote in message groups.com... On 27 Mar, 15:12, (Richard Harrison) wrote: Art wrote: "I have his (Kraus`) second edition (Antennas) and I find no mention of radiation from the beginning where current is applied onward." I think I have that edition too. If you review the chapter on "Point Sources" you`ll find: power patterns, a power theorem and its application to isotropic sources, rediation intensity, source with hemispheric power pattern, unidirectional cosine power pattern, etc., etc.. The new, now available 3rd ed. of "Antennas" by Kraus, Marhefka, and a host of others is greatly expanded and improved. It is worth the investment. Being uncertain of what Art really wants, doesn`t stop me from advising him to start by having a look at the famous Sommerfeld formula on page 804 of Terman`s 1955 opus. It predicts 1 kilowatt will produce 186 mv per m at a distance of 1 mile from a short vertical transmitting antenna given a certain ground conductivity and other conditions. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Richard, I have lots of books but as yet have not found the answer even tho many have posted none appear to really have an answer other than to throw stones. You apparently have found the answer! Could you quote from the books that you are refering to the angle of radiation relative to the radiator, thats it ? If you can't understand that then relay to me the angle of a radiation front relative to a radiator, I'm sure some other people are interested in what you found. Even better, let me know the TOA of a dipole in free space and how much it varies to that of the same dipole over a perfect ground. Use a computor program if you like, anything that sheds light on the matter . The books say that a horizontal "v" antenna should be tipped for max gain, doesn't that raise your interest about the reasoning and mathematics behind this? Jimmie D asked me to state this angle but I have only a expensive computor program that doesn't give the math with the answer. Please read off the angle and the specifics so we all can move on, I don't want a 160 thread postings some thrust upon Walt Art The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jimmie, You are way to quick with your answers which means you are not commited to follow thru in serious thinking. There is a perfectly logical reason for it if you are familiar with the study of waves and fields in electro magnetics.(grin) And there are a couple of people that stand above all others that will possibly provide as to why it is logical. Stand by quietly to listen and learn,you don't have to post if you have nothing to contribute! Read what Richard Harrison has kindly provided and use that as a solid base to think about I have worked very hard to get to this particular point in a thread so as to cut of diversionary talk at the outset. We have an observation, now we need the explanation............Should be a very short thread if we only count contributors with possible explanations as to what has been observed. I'll leave it to others to discern who are the real educated contributors and who are the lemmings. Regards Art Actually my short answers are short because they are to the point if I can find one in your ramblings.The point I made illustated an obvious fault and inconsistencey with your reasoning which you deflect with insults because you have no answers. I know what I had had no value to anyone else but since you were makeing an iirelevant connection between tilt angle of a V antenna and polarization I thought it may give you some pause for thought. Obviously a wasted effort on my part Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - No Jimmie, Richard Harrison gave a very clear starting point to my question which I might add was about an observation about dipoles. The "v" antenna was a subset of the discussion about the possibility of take of angle relative to the plane of antennas generally. None of the above refer to making a salad as you put it. I would point out however that the subject of TOA is a sutle question that relates to both instances but I will leave it up to you to determine that if you wish. On the subject of making a salad that was your statement not mine that you refer to as insulting. Cool down for a while and then step back in Art |
Why?
art wrote:
On 1 Apr, 16:05, wrote: art wrote: On 1 Apr, 14:37, "Jimmie D" wrote: "art" wrote in message snip prior babbling The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jimmie, You are way to quick with your answers which means you are not commited to follow thru in serious thinking. There is a perfectly logical reason for it Or, he knows what he is talking about and you are just babbling again. snip remaining babbling nonsense -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Jim Pennino, it was only a short time ago that you showed your ignorance of electrical laws (gaussian) by calling it nonsense and babling. Now you are attempting to concilidate your position of ignorance, and doing quite well at it I might add. I suggest you accept the same advice I gave Jimmie if you want to avoid being blown away by electric laws once again. Art Like all your other posts, this one makes no sense either. As I understand it, you want to blow me? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Why?
On 1 Apr, 17:35, wrote:
art wrote: On 1 Apr, 16:05, wrote: art wrote: On 1 Apr, 14:37, "Jimmie D" wrote: "art" wrote in message snip prior babbling The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jimmie, You are way to quick with your answers which means you are not commited to follow thru in serious thinking. There is a perfectly logical reason for it Or, he knows what he is talking about and you are just babbling again. snip remaining babbling nonsense -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Jim Pennino, it was only a short time ago that you showed your ignorance of electrical laws (gaussian) by calling it nonsense and babling. Now you are attempting to concilidate your position of ignorance, and doing quite well at it I might add. I suggest you accept the same advice I gave Jimmie if you want to avoid being blown away by electric laws once again. Art Like all your other posts, this one makes no sense either. As I understand it, you want to blow me? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Wow, I didn't know you lived near San Francisco. Your pattern of life is certainly different to that of the Mid West. I suppose if you must live near your "friemds" then you must go where the action your looking for is at. Hopefully you live at a long distance from schools and your computor is scanned regularly by the authorities.I had suspected from your postings that you were not "normal" as well as being uneducated. I am going to plonk your posts as I don't wish to be associated with you in any way especially that kind of talk. You make me shiver.... YUK |
Why?
art wrote:
Nothing but babble as usual. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:54 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com