Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Roy Lewallen wrote:

Oh Gesus! You self masturbating idiot!!! (and, did anyone ever tell
you that looks disgusting in public???)

You are not God, this is NOT a catholic, I don't feel guilty and we are
not in a confessional!

NUFF SAID!

JS

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

art wrote:

But a dead horse will never get upregardless of the amount of
whipping.
Regards
Art

"upregardless"???

Hmmm, I remember my wife mentioning that ... evil smirk

Regards,
JS

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:50:29 -0500, "AI4QJ" wrote:

So, in other words you agree

Hi Dan,

I use my own words, not other words, and certainly not laden with
artificial constraints and presumptions. If you want to ask a
question without all these drapes, go ahead; it is far simpler, and
consumes less bandwidth.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
It appears you missed the primary message of the Corum article.

I'm afraid you missed the point. As long as the frequency
is kept constant, the VF and Z0 of coil stock will be
relatively constant - why wouldn't it be? W8JI missed
the 4 MHz delay through that coil by at least a magnitude.
It is impossible for that delay to be 3 nS. The measured
delay through my 75m bugcatcher coil is 25 nS.

Yup, I guess I don't understand the "point". You continue to use the
equations and charts derived in the Corum article, but you don't agree
with his conditions and caveats. There would have been no purpose for
his article if your paragraph above was correct. Have you expanded the
applicability range for his results? Where can we find your IEEE white
paper?

So, the "point" is ??????

73,
Gene

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Cecil Moore wrote:

...
But since W8JI's measurements are NOT "supported by the
underlying principles", by your own assertions, he indeed
seems to be "shouting it at cars" on his web page. I am
merely objecting to a technical absurdity, e.g. a 3 nS
delay through a foot long loading coil. The standing-
wave current phase shift through a coil bears no
relationship to the delay through a coil.

Cecil:

Let's get real, principals above personalties ...

I don't know W8JI; from his pages, he seems alright. We all make
mistakes--that does not lessen us--I know you agree at some level ...

I have always looked at the lag of an inductance in degrees, the lead of
capacitance the same (when it comes to lump sums like antennas) ... I am
learning (a mindset on a certain model can limit one.) When someone
introduces the spinning of earth and its' rotation around the sun into
antenna formulas--I am always perplexed--such has NOTHING to do with
what is real in RF. Frankly, the importance of where your mind is at is
just beginning to hit home here.

If the earth/sun/solar-system did not exist--all would still be the same
.... this I KNOW.

There is SOMETHING we are ALL missing ... but, I do listen to your
arguments, I admit--I have a hard time following you--but then, you help
keeping me outta the bars and from fallen womens arms ;-) Your
argument(s) are based, somewhere, near the bone of the beast--well, I
think. Others are missing the core of this ...

Warm regards,
JS

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Gene Fuller wrote:
So, the "point" is ??????

Given a 100 foot long helical transmission line at
4 MHz terminated in its characteristic impedance.
The VF is easily measured. This is a slow-wave
configuration.

Change the length to 50 feet terminated in its
characteristic impedance. Why would the characteristic
impedance change? Why would the VF change?

The coil diameter is 0.5 feet. The coil diameter ratio
to wavelength is 0.002. The turns per foot is 48.
The turns per wavelength is about 11800. Reading from
Fig.1 in the Corum article gives a VF of about 0.02.
Why would that change appreciably with frequency?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

AI4QJ wrote:
The close spacing of the coils reduces the time delays because the current
is "pushed along" faster.

This is true to a certain extent but not to the extent
that coil#1 couples heavily to coil#100 which is ten
inches away in W8JI's configuration. The 3 nS "measured"
delay at 4 MHz is off by approximately a magnitude. It
is much closer to 30 nS than it is to 3 nS.

I measured a ~25 nS delay in a 75m bugcatcher coil.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

John Smith wrote:
There is SOMETHING we are ALL missing ... but, I do listen to your
arguments, I admit--I have a hard time following you ...

Well, let's take a simple example. Given a lossless
90 degree stub. What is the phase shift in the total
current from one end of the stub to the other?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
There is SOMETHING we are ALL missing ... but, I do listen to your
arguments, I admit--I have a hard time following you ...

Well, let's take a simple example. Given a lossless
90 degree stub. What is the phase shift in the total
current from one end of the stub to the other?

Hmmm, 360? No, 180? Hmmm, 90? Well, 89.999999999999999999?

Ok, I give up, tell me ... :-)

Regards,
JS

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

John Smith wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
There is SOMETHING we are ALL missing ... but, I do listen to your
arguments, I admit--I have a hard time following you ...

Well, let's take a simple example. Given a lossless
90 degree stub. What is the phase shift in the total
current from one end of the stub to the other?

Hmmm, 360? No, 180? Hmmm, 90? Well, 89.999999999999999999?

Ok, I give up, tell me ... :-)

Regards,
JS

Anyway, why current, wouldn't voltage make the same shift, although
inversely proportional?

Regards,
JS