|
On 07 Feb 2004 18:43:31 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich) wrote: They are NOT resonant at the frequencies of interest That is like saying the coil in a tank is not resonant by looking at the coil alone. Coil in a tank (with Cap) is not resonant on the same frequencu as "naked" coil. Big difference where it resonates. What a myopic way of looking at antenna design. My what? Loading coils are SERIES RESONANT, traps are PARALLEL RESONANT. Uh, huh! Bulsheet! If the COIL is self resonant (on frequency of interest), it becomes trap. The only difference is where the capacitor is. For a loading coil, the capacitor is made up of the reactance of a too short antenna. For a trap, there is a literal capacitor, AND the reactance of the antenna. And there is huge difference how the coil works in a circuit!!!! It could be a loading coil, or it could be a trap. That's why there are different names for it. If the antenna had no reactance, there would be no need for the loading coil (unless it is your next patent-applied for snow removal device). More W8JI rhetoric? Maybe time to grow up? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Using your jabs Richard, I would say that you are off the wall, rocker, tree, you name it. You are displaying lack of proficiency, understanding, basics, etc. He was talking about the COIL. Coil without "capacitor" made of antenna or rest of the radiator. LOADING COIL is a COIL - that's it. Coil will resonate rest of the antenna with its whatever reactance. But coil by itself will resonate somewhere else, depending on its internal capacitance. But definitely not on the resonant frequency of the ANTENNA. If it did then it would be a TRAP. And that is the difference, and that was what was asked. Loading COIL is not reasonant on the frequency (of interest) that we want antenna to be resonant on (unless using it as helical antenna), otherwise it would act as a TRAP and insulate the remaining portion of the radiator and make the portion of radiator up to the trap (coil) resonant on frequency corresponding to its (electrical) quarter wave length. If you can not comprehend the difference between the LOADING COIL and TRAP than rest of the discussions here are pointless and you should go back and re-read some books (how do you like that? :-) Yuri, K3BU.us Warning! I bite back! |
|
Uh-huh And if the Pope were Presbyterian he wouldn't be Agnostic....
Uh-Huh, and you are full of it and displaying conversion to W8JI ridiculing cult followers, good luck and enjoy it. Joining the freaktal team? 73 la - la |
On 07 Feb 2004 22:05:42 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote: Joining the freaktal team? Do you guys still hang out in robes at airports? |
Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:53:43 -0500, Stef wrote: Now I understand the loading coils on a bugcatcher are not resonnant, they're just loading coils. They ARE resonant, otherwise what's the point in using one? The *antenna* is resonant, Richard, the *coil* is not resonant. If the coil was resonant, you wouldn't need the rest of the antenna. -- 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! =----- |
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:27:52 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote: If the coil was resonant, you wouldn't need the rest of the antenna. Uh-huh, makes a trap an antenna? |
Richard Clark wrote:
Loading coils are SERIES RESONANT, traps are PARALLEL RESONANT. BS, Richard. If they were series resonant how could they possibly supply any inductive reactance which is what is needed to neutralize the capacitive reactance of the short antenna? A "SERIES RESONANT loading coil" is purely resistive, by definition. -- 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! =----- |
C'mon guys! Self resonance is significantly different from circuit
resonance!! DD Richard Clark wrote: On 07 Feb 2004 21:15:57 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich) wrote: That is like saying the coil in a tank is not resonant by looking at the coil alone. Coil in a tank (with Cap) is not resonant on the same frequencu as "naked" coil. Uh-huh And if the Pope were Presbyterian he wouldn't be Agnostic.... |
Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
Using your jabs Richard, I would say that you are off the wall, rocker, tree, you name it. You are displaying lack of proficiency, understanding, basics, etc. Not only that, Yuri, but he is desperately trying to change the subject away from the original. Have you noticed? That logical diversion, diverting the issue, is much older than Richard and won't work against people who recognize it. -- 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! =----- |
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:36:09 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote: BS, Richard. If they were series resonant how could they possibly supply any inductive reactance which is what is needed to neutralize the capacitive reactance of the short antenna? A "SERIES RESONANT loading coil" is purely resistive, by definition. and the cow jumped over the moon |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com