Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Jimmie D wrote:
Isnt the effect of needing more inductance as you go up the antenna related
to the fact that there is less capacitance between the coil and the
counterpoise?

See my stub example posting. It is related to losing electrical
degrees at the bottom of the coil.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Richard Clark wrote:
Your parenthetical is EXACTLY what devastates the logic of forcing the
real inductor to observe a constant angular length according to
Cecil's misapplication of the so-called Corum rule.

Sorry, that's a falsehood. I said the angular length is
within 10% accuracy just as Dr. Corum said.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Jimmie D wrote:
If the delay in the coil Cecil has talked about is measured without the
appropriate C and R would not this affect the normal parameters of the coil.
The delay through a delayline or a loading coil is dependent on more than
just L.

If the delay is measured using only a traveling-wave,
nothing except the coil parameters matter.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Richard Clark wrote:
You have proven through a very simple logic that Cecil's fixed angular
specification for a coil (a la the prostitution of Corum) fails
utterly. OTHERWISE, one coil would have satisfied all placements
along the length of the short monopole!

Absolute nonsense from an ignorant person. Please perform
my stub example calculations and get back to us. Why does
it take a longer length of 600 ohm line to perform the
resonating function when the 600 ohm line is placed in
the middle of the two 5 degree 100 ohm lines rather than
at the bottom end of the 10 degree 100 ohm line? Until
you understand that simple stub example you are just
full of you know what.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Jimmie D wrote:
I think most anyone should be able to tell that the loading coil of an 80M
mobile antenna is going to make up for most of the delay in the antenna. 3
to 4 nsec is obviously wrong, the problem for me is, where was the mistake
made.

The mistake was using standing-wave current, devoid of phase,
to measure phase. He should have used traveling-wave current
but that is hard to come by in a standing-wave antenna.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

John Smith wrote:
This is most likely a gray area because of the lack of apparatus
available to most "normal" amateurs, which can do meaningful
measurements ...

But what is to explain the lack of mental apparatus
available on this newsgroup? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Richard Clark wrote:

...
Skips along, talk about technically rigorous. This is more schoolgirl
diary writing.

Oh, I am sure he is quite sorry, if he knew some would be limited of
resources and need a detailed "picture", I am sure he would have
provided it ... in its' absence:

"Skips along", as in some portion of the signal is coupled to adjacent
turns in the form of capacitve coupling, this leads the signal being
carried the wire. Another portion of the signal is coupled to adjacent
turns, this lags the signal being carried by the wire--magnetic field
follows current--naturally ...

Now, I am sure you have a much better picture of what he is inferring
.... :-O

JS

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Richard Clark wrote:
Surprise us with a chorus of "Feelings" and maybe it will be you who
gets rolled out of the nest.

You are the "Feelings" guru, Richard. To you,
I admit, I cannot even hold a candle.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Owen Duffy wrote:
I should have added... but what are you going to do with a more accurate
estimate of the equivalent electrical length of the coil anyway?

Prove W8JI absolutely wrong? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
 

Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Some of the signal skips from coil to coil reducing
the phase shift through the coil.

In what, about 2-4 ns?

No, it increases the VF by roughly 2x in a typical coil.
Why don't you already know that fact?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com