|
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 26 Jun, 20:52, John Smith I wrote:
art wrote: ... but it does come to mind that the aperture, which is related to gain, ... Regards Art Yes Art, this IS the most perplexing of all ... the aperture ... How can you reduce an antenna with a "capture" of 1, to a "capture" of .3333333 and not suffer a signal loss of related proportions. I ponder this. Regards, JS Look at the antenna book by Jasik , small antennas section, where he shows examples of the increased aperture by adding a top hat. The aperture diameter INCREASES because of the side projection of the top hat, at least thats the way he shows it. Difficult to determine the fulcrum point for all cases shown with a cursury look. Regards Art |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
art wrote:
... Art: For my "rule of thumb" uses, the equation: 0.13 x (wavelength)2 gets me into the ballpark. And, although the aperture of a thin wire is almost nil, it is pictured as an ellipse-squared in the material I have digested, the preceding equation giving its effective aperture area ... You got anything better? Regards, JS |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
John Smith I wrote:
I also meant to include in the above post, this antenna performs admirably well with NO top hat (only a short whip) ... indeed, in that form the "disrespect for aperture" is most notable. JS |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
John Smith I wrote:
Actually, old news from 3 years ago ... http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.j...cleID=21600147 JS I am taking for granted that everyone realizes the inventor can be emailed directly: Regards, JS |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
John Smith I wrote:
[chit] OK. So I went and wrote the inventor, the correspondence follows, he knows naysaying idiots when he sees 'em--I think the following makes it quite obvious: Thanks John but I pay very little attention to that stuff. I now have a patent on the DLM and 6 more pending and several new applications in electromagnetics and antennas. I work with the EE dept here at URI and also with the physics dept. as well as several other departments where my antennas and expertise are being well received. I now also work with many undergrad and post grad students. The DLM works, they just don't want to admit it to themselves. What the DLM does is it stores magnetic potential energy in the inductance of the helix and moves it to another part of the antenna. In doing so creates a very large current profile along the antenna. It is 2.778 times greater that for a quarterwave for the same power input, hence it is why it is about 1/3 the size. I also invented the flat helix which makes the fully planner DLM possible. Anyway it has been licensed to several applications including cellphones, RFID and automotive applications. A large automotive supplier has it licensed for 6 applications with 4 more coming, One of these has been in tire pressure monitoring, using my antenna they invented the first batteryless RFID tire pressure monitor. Expect to use between 90 and 100 million antennas in 2008 in just this one application. They went from a nobody in that market to most likely owning it. Within a few years I will be a multi millionaire so you see I just don't give a dam what they think. Can you blame me, I am laughing all the way to the bank. I am now into thinfilm and monilithic antennas using DLM antenna technology. I now have antennas so small operatng in the Ghz region that you need to use a microscope to see them. Thanks for the info but I pay very little attention to what THOSE people say, think etc. They are pretty ignorant. Best regards and good to hear from you. Rob ===== Original Message From John Smith I ===== Mr. Vincent: Your DLM antenna has some discussion going on about it in amateur circles. You may wish to view the usenet news group "rec.radio.amateur.antenna" And, specifically, the thread: Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs! There have been a couple of naysayers! grin Warm regards, JS Robert Vincent Dept of Physics University of Rhode Island 401-874-2063 And, if you think EZNEC (and ALL other software emulation of real world constructions) is doing anything but running you in circles about the past--think again ... of course if all you wish to find is the past--it serves well ... Regards, JS |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 08:01:44 -0700, John Smith I
wrote: John Smith I wrote: Actually, old news from 3 years ago ... http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.j...cleID=21600147 JS I am taking for granted that everyone realizes the inventor can be emailed directly: Regards, JS the spammers will love this, but he will regret your posting his url openly. -- 73 for now Buck, N4PGW www.lumpuckeroo.com "Small - broadband - efficient: pick any two." |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
John Smith I wrote:
Buck wrote: ... the spammers will love this, but he will regret your posting his url openly. Naaa ... He works at a university, trust me, if he can't stop the spam from being in his mailbox, a co-worker/student can! Ever try gmail? That one simple tool allows me to freely give out my email ... if the spammers get though it, I will evoke other counter measures ... spam is only a problem for the computer illiterate ... Who ever head of posting url's in a newsgroup? (joke) That page appears to be the original one that came out in 2004. It's missing one part though. In the original release, there was a mention of how efficient the antenna was, proof cited was how when he turned the power up to 100 watts, the antenna melted. That part is gone. I googled up the thread to see if my memory was bad, but it wasn't. The release must have been revised. So has there been a breakthrough in how the antenna maintains a constant current through it? Can we assume the voltage must be constant also? - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
Michael Coslo wrote:
So has there been a breakthrough in how the antenna maintains a constant current through it? Can we assume the voltage must be constant also? If the ends of a 1/2WL dipole are terminated to ground by ~1000 ohm resistors, the antenna current is relatively constant. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
Michael Coslo wrote:
... It's missing one part though. In the original release, there was a mention of how efficient the antenna was, proof cited was how when he turned the power up to 100 watts, the antenna melted. That part is gone. I googled ... - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - Actually, if you don't get the coils in the proper ratio/position to each other, efficiency drops DRAMATICALLY! Like usual, the best configuration to give the best reception of a known and stable signal also results in the antenna being to configured to achieve maximum radiation ... Or simply, if the antenna isn't performing as a full length 1/2 wave--reconfigure 'till it does! Which, using the test fixture I supplied, is done quickly with no problem ... JS |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
Cecil Moore wrote:
... If the ends of a 1/2WL dipole are terminated to ground by ~1000 ohm resistors, the antenna current is relatively constant. :-) Cecil: In one of the configurations of a 1/2 wave, the bottom helix and length of the straight length of radiator ends up right at ~8.1 ft. The upper loading coil and top-hat/upper-radiator ends up being ~8.1 ft. This, most likely, helps to force the current into that upper loading coil. As, Robert Vincent, has mentioned something about "storing" the rf energy in the bottom helix with the effect of it having a relationship to "driving" the upper portion of the antenna. I don't know, he has offered me a CD with complete data on the antenna, I am arranging a anonymous address to have the CD shipped to now ... JS |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
John Smith I wrote:
[stuff] Actually, I got those figs wrong, I am late to a meeting, can't find the paper with the final/optimized lengths/ratios/dia/turns for 10m ... I'll send post/email 'em later today so as to have it right--just in case there is one guy with the energy curiosity to kludge one together ... Most important thing, I can tell, is the ratio of inductance between the coils--my final length of all coils/radiators if .333% of full 1/2 half .... a darn good mobile antenna! JS |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 17 Jun, 16:13, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
"John Smith I" wrote in ... Actually, old news from 3 years ago ... http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.j...cleID=21600147 JS The guy doesn't even seem to realise that height is one of the prime factors in optimising propogation, particularly at medium wave frequencies and vhf. Building a tall mast costs plenty of money and if commercial radio stations could broadcast efficiently from an antenna the size of a bean can, they would have done it years ago. This is surely just a couple of coils wound in opposite directions with capacitive coupling and a capacity top hat to prevent coronal discharge and maximise current in the top half of the antenna. Basically a form of top loaded, inductively wound whip antenna tapped somewhere up from the base in order to pick up a 50 ohm matching impedence at the design frequency. I don't see any new or innovative principles at work here. Now if he could make it work efficiently on all frequencies with 50 ohms impedence and with no requirement for further matching or adjustment of any sort, I would be impressed. :-) Mike G0ULI Mike The antenna is based on confirmed scientific findings of the masters and can be proved mathematically as one would expect from such an antenna. It is true that what happens to radiation when it is formed is important but what is more important is to understand radiation in its formative stage. When this is understood then miniturisation comes to the fore that may well be more important than the TOA but then even this antenna can be raised in height. There is a lesson to be learned here. The Yagi was invented by the Japanese in the early 1920 where America embraced the invention and where Japan did not. That same invention proved to be one of Japans undoing as they never caught on to the importance possibly by beurocracy. This new antenna has been pushed aside by America where I am positive other Countries are moving fast ahead and now have 3 years lead to play with. It is America this time that is complacent. The antenna is there, the mathematics is there and Maxwells laws are still there, all of which conform with each other both with this antenna and my Gaussian antenna but who cares. Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
"art" wrote in message oups.com... On 17 Jun, 16:13, "Mike Kaliski" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in ... Actually, old news from 3 years ago ... http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.j...cleID=21600147 JS The guy doesn't even seem to realise that height is one of the prime factors in optimising propogation, particularly at medium wave frequencies and vhf. Building a tall mast costs plenty of money and if commercial radio stations could broadcast efficiently from an antenna the size of a bean can, they would have done it years ago. This is surely just a couple of coils wound in opposite directions with capacitive coupling and a capacity top hat to prevent coronal discharge and maximise current in the top half of the antenna. Basically a form of top loaded, inductively wound whip antenna tapped somewhere up from the base in order to pick up a 50 ohm matching impedence at the design frequency. I don't see any new or innovative principles at work here. Now if he could make it work efficiently on all frequencies with 50 ohms impedence and with no requirement for further matching or adjustment of any sort, I would be impressed. :-) Mike G0ULI Mike The antenna is based on confirmed scientific findings of the masters and can be proved mathematically as one would expect from such an antenna. It is true that what happens to radiation when it is formed is important but what is more important is to understand radiation in its formative stage. When this is understood then miniturisation comes to the fore that may well be more important than the TOA but then even this antenna can be raised in height. There is a lesson to be learned here. The Yagi was invented by the Japanese in the early 1920 where America embraced the invention and where Japan did not. That same invention proved to be one of Japans undoing as they never caught on to the importance possibly by beurocracy. This new antenna has been pushed aside by America where I am positive other Countries are moving fast ahead and now have 3 years lead to play with. It is America this time that is complacent. The antenna is there, the mathematics is there and Maxwells laws are still there, all of which conform with each other both with this antenna and my Gaussian antenna but who cares. Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG Art There is a place for miniaturised antennas, particularly for military applications where size and weight of the antenna outweigh other considerations which are important to commercial and amateur users e.g bandwidth and efficiency. The yagi has great front to back ratios and makes for a great if slightly narrow band antenna for UHF TV reception here in the UK. These antennas are generally sold tuned to cover the local TV frequency channels rather than the whole of the UHF TV band. A lot of people will need to buy new antennas when the switch over to digital TV broadcasting takes place as the digital channels have been arranged to be at the opposite ends of the band to analogue TV in most areas. The yagi was probably the first antenna that did not conform to antenna theory as it was understood at the time it was developed. Small loops and E-H antennas also appear to defy logic at first glance but careful analysis of their performance has revealed how they work with higher efficiencies than previously believed possible. Unfortunately for some, there is no magic or defiance of the accepted laws of physics involved in the way they work. There are still areas which provide fertile areas for experimentation, particularly at the extremes of the radio frequency spectrum. Regards Mike |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 3 Jul, 09:40, art wrote:
On 17 Jun, 16:13, "Mike Kaliski" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in ... Actually, old news from 3 years ago ... http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.j...cleID=21600147 JS The guy doesn't even seem to realise that height is one of the prime factors in optimising propogation, particularly at medium wave frequencies and vhf. Building a tall mast costs plenty of money and if commercial radio stations could broadcast efficiently from an antenna the size of a bean can, they would have done it years ago. This is surely just a couple of coils wound in opposite directions with capacitive coupling and a capacity top hat to prevent coronal discharge and maximise current in the top half of the antenna. Basically a form of top loaded, inductively wound whip antenna tapped somewhere up from the base in order to pick up a 50 ohm matching impedence at the design frequency. I don't see any new or innovative principles at work here. Now if he could make it work efficiently on all frequencies with 50 ohms impedence and with no requirement for further matching or adjustment of any sort, I would be impressed. :-) Mike G0ULI Mike The antenna is based on confirmed scientific findings of the masters and can be proved mathematically as one would expect from such an antenna. It is true that what happens to radiation when it is formed is important but what is more important is to understand radiation in its formative stage. When this is understood then miniturisation comes to the fore that may well be more important than the TOA but then even this antenna can be raised in height. There is a lesson to be learned here. The Yagi was invented by the Japanese in the early 1920 where America embraced the invention and where Japan did not. That same invention proved to be one of Japans undoing as they never caught on to the importance possibly by beurocracy. This new antenna has been pushed aside by America where I am positive other Countries are moving fast ahead and now have 3 years lead to play with. It is America this time that is complacent. The antenna is there, the mathematics is there and Maxwells laws are still there, all of which conform with each other both with this antenna and my Gaussian antenna but who cares. Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Mike, As a Londoner you will appreciate the following. When the war finished I started my first real schooling at a school that was surrounded by blocks of debris but the school was still standing. It was destroyed in WW1 with about 30+ kids dead. Finally dad got demobbed and came home to our house which was a bomb damaged house because the other house was flattened.We as a pair went to Petticote lane on Sundays because dad had a interest in radio and I had to get the water batteries to run it. One day dad came back from Petticoat lane and brought home with him a coil of wire that you plugged into an outlet and that was the new antenna. I had not had much schooling up to that time and at the age of 14 had only one year before one had to leave and go to work. Mum got me into a school at dockside for ships engineers and navigators and tho a year late I at least got two years of education despite the war which followed by years and years of night school I got the education that any college kid even tho I was 10 years older. Now I have the mantra that if it is" resonant and in a state of equilibrium" it is what I call a Gaussian antenna. So here at near the end of my life I finally got to the bottom of the science that dad put before me as peace settled on the East End of London. What dad plugged into the wall was an antenna that was "resonant and in a state of equilibrium" and where its resonance was in the AM band. 60 years later his son resolved the question because of the pursuit of an education. Shame he isn't alive to hear 'the rest of the story' Cheers and beers Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 26 Jun, 13:34, John Smith I wrote:
Buck wrote: ... The section below with pictures made a difference. I saw that the patent is in concept, that is the arrangement of the coils for the desired effect and the design of coils which can be helical, squared off, etc. Thanks. Buck Buck: Yeah, all that alright. However, he also claims the "arrangement" he has increases the impedance of the 1/4 wave shortened antenna to 72-100 ohms. This is interesting in and of itself, shortened antennas tend to have impedances in the single digits and are difficult to match efficiently ... I am just beginning to toy with this version, maybe can get serious this weekend ... Regards, JS What Buck has stated as well as what the inventor has stated is in full agreement to what I have always stated and proved. "The radiator can be any shape or size or angle etc.as long as it is in equilibrium and resonant which is buried in the laws of the masters" The question of apurture is purely a reflection of efficiency which when included in a closed circle shows that vividly with repect to enclosed area. The same antenna arrangement is a reflection of Gaussian law and as such can be removed from any ground assumptions that is inferred by those who have done this and done that. That same element can be duplicated to form a dipole of any shape to remove the inefficiencies of ground and can even be multiplied in number to form an array in accordance with the Gaussian antenna. It all comes down to actually understanding the underpinnings of the formation of radiation rather than learned laws where one is not interested in advancing for the good of science. Once upon a time I saw an experiment formed where a bunch of coils placed on a paper plate was placed on top of a car where radiation lit a fluerescent lamp..........same buried law. And then we come to the fractal antenna...........same buried law of which the mathematics given thoroughly proves tho rejected by ham radio. I know you can smell it. Art Unwin KB9MZ......XG |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 3 Jul, 10:17, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
"art" wrote in message oups.com... On 17 Jun, 16:13, "Mike Kaliski" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in ... Actually, old news from 3 years ago ... http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.j...cleID=21600147 JS The guy doesn't even seem to realise that height is one of the prime factors in optimising propogation, particularly at medium wave frequencies and vhf. Building a tall mast costs plenty of money and if commercial radio stations could broadcast efficiently from an antenna the size of a bean can, they would have done it years ago. This is surely just a couple of coils wound in opposite directions with capacitive coupling and a capacity top hat to prevent coronal discharge and maximise current in the top half of the antenna. Basically a form of top loaded, inductively wound whip antenna tapped somewhere up from the base in order to pick up a 50 ohm matching impedence at the design frequency. I don't see any new or innovative principles at work here. Now if he could make it work efficiently on all frequencies with 50 ohms impedence and with no requirement for further matching or adjustment of any sort, I would be impressed. :-) Mike G0ULI Mike The antenna is based on confirmed scientific findings of the masters and can be proved mathematically as one would expect from such an antenna. It is true that what happens to radiation when it is formed is important but what is more important is to understand radiation in its formative stage. When this is understood then miniturisation comes to the fore that may well be more important than the TOA but then even this antenna can be raised in height. There is a lesson to be learned here. The Yagi was invented by the Japanese in the early 1920 where America embraced the invention and where Japan did not. That same invention proved to be one of Japans undoing as they never caught on to the importance possibly by beurocracy. This new antenna has been pushed aside by America where I am positive other Countries are moving fast ahead and now have 3 years lead to play with. It is America this time that is complacent. The antenna is there, the mathematics is there and Maxwells laws are still there, all of which conform with each other both with this antenna and my Gaussian antenna but who cares. Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG Art There is a place for miniaturised antennas, particularly for military applications where size and weight of the antenna outweigh other considerations which are important to commercial and amateur users e.g bandwidth and efficiency. The yagi has great front to back ratios and makes for a great if slightly narrow band antenna for UHF TV reception here in the UK. These antennas are generally sold tuned to cover the local TV frequency channels rather than the whole of the UHF TV band. A lot of people will need to buy new antennas when the switch over to digital TV broadcasting takes place as the digital channels have been arranged to be at the opposite ends of the band to analogue TV in most areas. The yagi was probably the first antenna that did not conform to antenna theory as it was understood at the time it was developed. Small loops and E-H antennas also appear to defy logic at first glance but careful analysis of their performance has revealed how they work with higher efficiencies than previously believed possible. Unfortunately for some, there is no magic or defiance of the accepted laws of physics involved in the way they work. There are still areas which provide fertile areas for experimentation, particularly at the extremes of the radio frequency spectrum. Regards Mike- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Interesting that you mentioned efficiency. Radiation in itself is very efficient i.e. in the 98% region It is how we use it is where the efficiency goes down. But if initial efficiency starts of with 98% and with a superconductor we gain two percent it becomes very obvious that loss of efficiency even if large is minor when compared to the reduction in size. As far as narrow bandedness is concerned of the yagi this has little to do with efficiency but with what we do with the radiation which by coupling as a method of focussing to get a major lobe. True this is an advantage to some but the penalty is narrow banded because of compromises that are forced upon one where the desirables do not appear in sync with each other. So yes a very small antenna may be less efficient but how much does that loss in efficiency match up to the advantage in size and where the final shape provides desirables that are in sync with each other. Amateurs have long thought that bigger is better and if it doesn't fall down then it is not big enough! All of which is not based on radiation itself but on the basis of Yagi technique on how we use that radiation. Times have changed from the old days where gain was everything. Miniturization has become so important as well as equal surrounding coverage that the cell phone has become an instantaneous replacement for long distance transmission in the commercial world. As I read in this latest quarterly magazine for the antenna trade the biggest hold up today in communications is to design drivers with low impedance levels such as 5 ohms where this in fact misuses modern day science. We now can obtain miniturised design with minimul reduction of bandwidth and minimul loss of comparitive efficiency where higher impedance feed is so more electrically efficient that it makes low impedance a lost cause. I am quite sure that other countries are not discarding such logic and thus taking advantage of the intervening years for advances in the military field where secrecy can be adhered to. Well at least for a while. Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ.....XG |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
snip
Mike, As a Londoner you will appreciate the following. When the war finished I started my first real schooling at a school that was surrounded by blocks of debris but the school was still standing. It was destroyed in WW1 with about 30+ kids dead. Finally dad got demobbed and came home to our house which was a bomb damaged house because the other house was flattened.We as a pair went to Petticote lane on Sundays because dad had a interest in radio and I had to get the water batteries to run it. One day dad came back from Petticoat lane and brought home with him a coil of wire that you plugged into an outlet and that was the new antenna. I had not had much schooling up to that time and at the age of 14 had only one year before one had to leave and go to work. Mum got me into a school at dockside for ships engineers and navigators and tho a year late I at least got two years of education despite the war which followed by years and years of night school I got the education that any college kid even tho I was 10 years older. Now I have the mantra that if it is" resonant and in a state of equilibrium" it is what I call a Gaussian antenna. So here at near the end of my life I finally got to the bottom of the science that dad put before me as peace settled on the East End of London. What dad plugged into the wall was an antenna that was "resonant and in a state of equilibrium" and where its resonance was in the AM band. 60 years later his son resolved the question because of the pursuit of an education. Shame he isn't alive to hear 'the rest of the story' Cheers and beers Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG Art Even though I was born some years after the war ended, I do have some old magazines and articles that mention such an antenna. I believe that there were two or three (perhaps more) rival designs around in the 50's possibly into the early 60's that claimed to improve radio reception dramatically. The arrival and shift of interest into television seems to have sounded the death knell for these devices. As I recall, some of the pundits at the time were rather disparaging about these miracle antennas and indeed most designs were proved to be fraudulant, but one design did actually work and genuinely provided improved performance. I would guess that this was probably the one your dad acquired. I believe the design that worked did so because it achieved a genuine impedence match wereas the others were just devices that hooked up the radio to the house mains and used that to provide an antenna. Not very safe at all!!! One device proved to be just a high resistance wirewound resistor connected to the mains. So the genuine device did achieve provide a proper match and achieved a kind of what might be termed equilibrium with the receiver. These devices weren't particularly cheap to buy either. Looking at antenna prices today, I see that hundreds of dollars can be spent on a couple of dollars worth of fibreglass, aluminium and a bit of wire, so things haven't changed that much I guess. That is surely why rec.radio.amateur.antenna exists and is so popular; to provide an alternative to those people that do want to think for themselves rather than blindly following the path commercial manufacturers dictate. Regards Mike G0ULI |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 18 Jun, 12:01, Jim Lux wrote:
J. Mc Laughlin wrote: Dear Group: Details of the patent applications may be found on the USPTO's site. Robert J. Vincent (Electronics Technician II, Physics-URI) Application 20060022883; published Feb. 2, 2006 Application 20070132647; published June 14, 2007 I think that ends in ..649 filed 25 Jan 2007 one might note that claims 1-23 were cancelled... The second application is basically a revision of the first amd has more details of why it has priority over earlier applications (presumably over other inventors?) The first is a continuation application as well. I'm going to guess that the examiner came back on the first app and said: Uh,uh, you need to update to establish why a)you're first and b) why you're novel If you've got significant time available, compare the two applications and it may be revealed 73, Mac N8TT -- J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A. Home: - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jim, I just looked at the patent application and I feel the University has not been a service to the inventor. The university did not supply or did not have the mathematical underpinning of the design. The whole patent evolves about one antenna arrived in experimental form. As normal additional claims were made in an effort to cover other possibilites of that empirically found antenna without the mathematical underpinnings to guide for additional claims. Yes he has numourous claims but without the underminnings the claims are severely hampered. I would have thought that any University after being presented emperical results would have followed the lines of any scientific institution until the underlining mathematics could be solved to provide a firm basis for the application based on science or mathematics of which the antenna was just one sample to validate the request. At least the University gave him an avenue to pursue the patent in the hope that something of value would rub of as some sort of esteem but without scientific backing from extensions of laws of past masters I cannot see that comming about. For instance he has made no reference to the makings of radiation, it's pulsatic form or a connection to all other laws of the masters other than laymans terms of what a inductance does other than refering to the current bucking. Both of the patents will come out together and the combination will be instructive. My request publishing date will be held back until at least the first review since I wrote it myself together with the request for examiner help, a given proviso that is provided for inventors who have not handed all power to an attorney and who relies on direct comunication with the examiners by the inventor himself. This way the claims which is really the only guts that count with a patent are a cooperative development between the examiner and the patentee which gives it a perceived advantage if litigation is followed. In one past application there was numourous intercomunications between the examiner as well as his boss before a particular claim was formulated as the first claim that satisfied all based on given information and around which other claims were made. Since my claim was not of a commercial nature some errors were agreed to but as a learning exersize which is how I treat anything I do, it was a extremely good learning experience. One patent I pulled or let it run out before review because of so many doubting thomases and now I can't even remember what is was and what I did with the paperwork. That also was a learning experience that I will not duplicate. As far as the tests applied to the new invention from the University where the testing was against another antenna under the same conditions. This totally nullified ground conditions and other environmetal conditions that can change the attributes of the test in both an disadvantegous way as well as advantageous allowing for a apples and apples comparison where very questionable observables were cancelled out. With reference to Jim Lux comments with respect to the testing procedure. I certainly see that as a reputable test if one accepts the validity of the specs assigned to that which it is being compared to. Which is tested in the very same environment and using the very same equipment. As an engineer I see no better way to test an antenna for the military. Trust but verify which is often beyond the amateur who often relies on smell. Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ.....XG. |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
"art" wrote
... I have always stated and proved. "The radiator can be any shape or size or angle etc.as long as it is in equilibrium and resonant which is buried in the laws of the masters" ____________ A distinction needs to be made between the ability of a conductor of any size/shape to efficiently produce EM fields from the r-f current flowing along it, and the capability of the associated transmitter and transmission line to deliver that r-f current. A good conductor of EVERY size/shape (including even a point source) will radiate virtually ALL the r-f power that can be made to flow into it -- which quantity equals the product of the square of the r-f current at the feedpoint, and the resistive term of the impedance there (ie, the radiation resistance). If the radiating structure (antenna) is not self-resonant, there will be an impedance mismatch between it and the transmission line connected to its feedpoint. This means that the antenna will not accept all of the transmitter power that could be delivered it to by the transmission line. But whatever power does transfer into the antenna will be radiated with the same high efficiency as if the match was perfect. There are many examples of non-resonant (highly reactive) antenna structures that, with proper system design, radiate a very high percentage the power available from the transmitter. Common examples of this are the monopole radiators used by MW AM broadcast stations -- very few of which are self-resonant. High radiation efficiency is achieved in these non-resonant antennas by the use of a matching network at the antenna feedpoint, which cancels the reactance of the monopole, and transforms the r-f resistance term there to match the Zo of the transmission line in use. This results in an impedance match capable of passing nearly all the power available from the transmission line, despite the fact that the antenna itself remains non-resonant, and without setting up high standing waves on the transmission line. The only significant losses.then are the attenuation of the transmission line, the loss in the matching network, and the loss in the r-f ground system. In normal broadcast station practice these losses are small enough for the groundwave field at 1 km to be 90% or better of the theoretical value for a perfect radiator of that electrical height and applied power, over a perfect ground plane. Bottom line (N.B. Art): antennas do not need to be resonant to perform as very efficient radiators. RF |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 4 Jul, 05:14, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote... I have always stated and proved. "The radiator can be any shape or size or angle etc.as long as it is in equilibrium and resonant which is buried in the laws of the masters" ____________ A distinction needs to be made between the ability of a conductor of any size/shape to efficiently produce EM fields from the r-f current flowing along it, and the capability of the associated transmitter and transmission line to deliver that r-f current. A good conductor of EVERY size/shape (including even a point source) will radiate virtually ALL the r-f power that can be made to flow into it -- which quantity equals the product of the square of the r-f current at the feedpoint, and the resistive term of the impedance there (ie, the radiation resistance). If the radiating structure (antenna) is not self-resonant, there will be an impedance mismatch between it and the transmission line connected to its feedpoint. This means that the antenna will not accept all of the transmitter power that could be delivered it to by the transmission line. But whatever power does transfer into the antenna will be radiated with the same high efficiency as if the match was perfect. There are many examples of non-resonant (highly reactive) antenna structures that, with proper system design, radiate a very high percentage the power available from the transmitter. Common examples of this are the monopole radiators used by MW AM broadcast stations -- very few of which are self-resonant. High radiation efficiency is achieved in these non-resonant antennas by the use of a matching network at the antenna feedpoint, which cancels the reactance of the monopole, and transforms the r-f resistance term there to match the Zo of the transmission line in use. This results in an impedance match capable of passing nearly all the power available from the transmission line, despite the fact that the antenna itself remains non-resonant, and without setting up high standing waves on the transmission line. The only significant losses.then are the attenuation of the transmission line, the loss in the matching network, and the loss in the r-f ground system. In normal broadcast station practice these losses are small enough for the groundwave field at 1 km to be 90% or better of the theoretical value for a perfect radiator of that electrical height and applied power, over a perfect ground plane. Bottom line (N.B. Art): antennas do not need to be resonant to perform as very efficient radiators. RF All very true. But the bottomline is not just efficient antennas but also having the radiation field where you want it at an inexpensive way, that is compatible with your lot size and in cluster form i.e. array. The antenna from the University is resonant tho less efficient than ideal But many hams with small lots place in high esteem an antenna that tho a bit less in efficiency gets the job done. But with all that said I have no problem with anything that you have stated. Lets face it, if a ham can get on the air with a small antenna tho losses may be 1-2 db he has achieved all he wanted to do and other hams who are positioned in the right places will certainly view his signal as an equal. Best regards Art |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims toincite/provok...
Art, KB9MZ.....XG wrote:
"The Yagi was invented by Japanese in the early 1920 where America embraced the invention and where Japan did not." Close but no cigar. Truth Squad time again. The 3rd edition of Kraus` "Antennas" has the Yagi-Uda Story beginning on page 246. It Says: "This led to the publication of a series of articles from March 1926 to July 1929) in the Journal of the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan titled "On the Wireless Beam of Short Electric Waves." (Uda-1)." Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
"art" wrote
The antenna from the University is resonant, tho less efficient than ideal. _________________ Reprise for Art: The efficiency of an antenna system in radiating the power available at the antenna end of the transmission line connected to its feedpoint does not depend on whether or not the radiator itself is naturally resonant. It depends on... 1) the ratio of the radiation resistance of the radiating sections of the antenna to the sum of that radiation resistance with all other r-f resistances in the antenna system. The pure radiation resistance of an antenna depends on the effective length//configuration of, and the r-f current distribution along the conductors exposed to space -- but not those of any matching devices used in the system design (wherever located). 2) the degree of impedance match existing between the antenna feedpoint and the source (normally, a transmission line, including any matching network there). The DLM uses matching components within the length of a short vertical radiator with the goals of canceling the high capacitive reactance of this electrically short radiator, and changing the current distribution along the radiator for an average value higher than provided by base loading. So for the same losses in the r-f ground system, the DLM could have somewhat better system radiation efficiency than a base-loaded monopole of the same physical height. But good system efficiency would still be heavily dependent on the quality of the r-f ground used with it (just as in a "standard" monopole). This is not a revolutionary concept, as mid- and top-loading techniques have been used with vertical monopoles for many decades. RF |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims toincite/provok...
Art wrote:
"I suppose ham radio reflects the veterans of WW2 there many of those who were doers are gradually dying off leaving former CBers in the majority." I qualify for all of the above, WW-2 overseas veteran, radio amateur, CBer, but I`m not dead yet. I also had a 1st class phone license and an E.E. degree, among others. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI1 |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims toincite/provok...
Art wrote:
"Now I have a mantra that if it is "resonant and in a state of equilibriun" it is what I call a Gaussian antenna." Yes, and the question still remains, are the lyrics sung because they are too silly to be repeated without the music? Best regards, Richard Harrison. KB5WZI |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provok...
On 4 Jul, 08:07, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art, KB9MZ.....XG wrote: "The Yagi was invented by Japanese in the early 1920 where America embraced the invention and where Japan did not." Close but no cigar. Truth Squad time again. The 3rd edition of Kraus` "Antennas" has the Yagi-Uda Story beginning on page 246. It Says: "This led to the publication of a series of articles from March 1926 to July 1929) in the Journal of the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan titled "On the Wireless Beam of Short Electric Waves." (Uda-1)." Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI The truth! Where is the lie? |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 4 Jul, 08:14, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote The antenna from the University is resonant, tho less efficient than ideal. _________________ Reprise for Art: The efficiency of an antenna system in radiating the power available at the antenna end of the transmission line connected to its feedpoint does not depend on whether or not the radiator itself is naturally resonant. It depends on... 1) the ratio of the radiation resistance of the radiating sections of the antenna to the sum of that radiation resistance with all other r-f resistances in the antenna system. The pure radiation resistance of an antenna depends on the effective length//configuration of, and the r-f current distribution along the conductors exposed to space -- but not those of any matching devices used in the system design (wherever located). 2) the degree of impedance match existing between the antenna feedpoint and the source (normally, a transmission line, including any matching network there). The DLM uses matching components within the length of a short vertical radiator with the goals of canceling the high capacitive reactance of this electrically short radiator, and changing the current distribution along the radiator for an average value higher than provided by base loading. So for the same losses in the r-f ground system, the DLM could have somewhat better system radiation efficiency than a base-loaded monopole of the same physical height. But good system efficiency would still be heavily dependent on the quality of the r-f ground used with it (just as in a "standard" monopole). This is not a revolutionary concept, as mid- and top-loading techniques have been used with vertical monopoles for many decades. RF The term " cancelling " is not correct tho people seem to be happy with it. In fact is it is not CANCELLING anything as it is actually adding to provide a state of equilibrium. Big difference Art |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims toincite/provok...
Art wrote:
"Where is the lie?" The inventors were not without honor on their own land! Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provok...
On 4 Jul, 10:11, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art wrote: "Where is the lie?" The inventors were not without honor on their own land! Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Bull, They were ignored.Japan had not implimented the idea up till such time that one was captured from the Allies. Pretty much the same as with the inventor of the concept "Just in time" for Industry. Reverred in Japan and ignored in the U.S.until the Japanese "invasion." What I said is NOT A LIE. Unfortunately Kraus must have died thus preventing its addition to his book. Seems like you need to get a book that is up to date and relavent before you call me a LIAR. |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims toincite/provok...
Art wrote:
"Bull. They were ignored. Japan had not implemented the idea up till such time that one was captured from the allies." Wikiipedia history confirms Art`s version of the Yagi`s story. I was wrong. I appologize. The Japanese paid little attention to their own invention. How did we get so lucky? Sorry for accusing Art of Yagi misinformation. Now, I think we are agreed that resonance is a nonreactive load. I don`t know what Art means by "equilibrium" in regard to the dynamic electrical characteristics of an antenna. We know that the same quantity can be added to both sides of an equation and just like a scale balance, no change in value occurs. Twenty questions should not be required to get an answer. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
"art" wrote
The term " cancelling " is not correct tho people seem to be happy with it. In fact is it is not CANCELLING anything as it is actually adding to provide a state of equilibrium. Big difference. _____________ That's what you meant by equilibrium ! Kindly note that "equilibrium" (or resonance) does not need to be an attribute of the radiator itself, only a desirable attribute of the complete antenna system. RF |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provok...
On 4 Jul, 11:45, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art wrote: "Bull. They were ignored. Japan had not implemented the idea up till such time that one was captured from the allies." Wikiipedia history confirms Art`s version of the Yagi`s story. I was wrong. I appologize. The Japanese paid little attention to their own invention. How did we get so lucky? Sorry for accusing Art of Yagi misinformation. Now, I think we are agreed that resonance is a nonreactive load. I don`t know what Art means by "equilibrium" in regard to the dynamic electrical characteristics of an antenna. We know that the same quantity can be added to both sides of an equation and just like a scale balance, no change in value occurs. Twenty questions should not be required to get an answer. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Place your complaint to David not I. I had to supply specific answers without embelishment to specific questions created and composed by David who maintained total control. I got scolded when I attempted to give guidance and my hands were tied Those questions did me no favours since some used those answers given without correlating context to ellicit cheap guffaws of contempt in my direction |
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provok...
|
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provoke amateurs!
On 17 Jun, 18:40, John Smith I wrote:
art wrote: ... I assume that the testing people know their business so why can't hams accept it? ... He states it uses a "2-dimensional helix", think about that (since I can't find a pic or construction details), flatten a helix and you end up with a zig-zag pattern of wire. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... etc. ... (poorly represented in ascii here) This must drop the inductance of the "helix coil" drastically, leaving you with only the self-capacitance of the conductor (-jX), which requires a "loading coil" of +jX ... Also, there is some text I interpret to suggest there is some additional coupling somewhere at the center, however, I can't find enough material to confirm or reject this ... JS I have had a rethink on this antenna. There is a already a helix antenna in the ARRL handbook This "new " antenna is the same thing in that the coil is wound tighter and the capacitance lost is replaced by a top hat. I cannot see how this antenna can be seen as a advance in the state of the art. There are lots of whips that have an inductance plus a top hat so there is no advance in the state of the art. Yes it works but so does all the other whips with a inductance and a top hat. This would fit in with the PTO rejecting the initial patent request as it does not provide an advance in the art of antennas compared to the norm that is naturally anticipated by those skilled in the state of the art. All in all I can't see it getting a patent unless it is so totally itemised specifically in dimension such that it could be rendered useless by commercial users. In fact I see nothing that prevents manufacture by anybody for monetary advantage if one so chooses Art Unwin KB9MZ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com