On 5 Dec, 07:32, art wrote:
On 5 Dec, 06:29, Cecil Moore wrote:





Roy Lewallen wrote:
Take a look at my 2005 measurements and see if you can do what Cecil and
Yuri failed to do coherently -- use the "replacement" concept and
explain where the missing degrees went.

I didn't fail to explain them, Roy, you just failed to listen
to reason, ploinked me, and started uttering Big Lies about
me.

In my 75m mobile base-loaded bugcatcher antenna:
1. The coil occupies ~25 degrees of antenna.
2. The impedance discontinuity at the coil to stinger
junction provides a ~44 degree phase shift.
3. The stinger occupies ~11 degrees of antenna.

At resonance the antenna is electrically
25+54+11 = 90 deg long even though it is physically
only ~12 degrees long.

All of the "missing degrees" appear at the impedance
discontinuities but you already know that since I
explained this to you two years ago.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Gentleman.
An update on Gaussian antennas
Guffaws heard

Took apart my helix wound on a garbage can for 160M
which was 1.5 :1 form wound and decided to make it
in horizontal element form.
Wires were 28 feet in length and I wound them tightly on
a 2 inch plastic pipe with pairs of wires,
two wires up and two wires down.
Made three of these assemblies and let the insulated wire "spring"
so I could place them on a 20 foot plastic pipe ,again 2 inches
diameter
and then connected them up with wire nuts.
When near to the ground the resonant impedance was in the
hundreds and changed little in the hunt for a sweet spot.
When placed 70 feet up impedances went to pot so I made
another two assemblies and connected them to the antenna assy.
without changing the overal length. Impedance was less than 2:1
across the 160 metre band. This resonance point I would call a
std resonance, where as, the ground measured a anti resonance.
As you can see the antenna revolves arounda full wave and
thus does not require a ground plain and conforms with
my Gaussian definition for a radiator.( The radiator can be any
size ,shape or elevation as long as the material is diamagnetic
and in a state of equilibrium)
( This, by the way, can be seem as what Einstein was looking for
twenty years but without success)
As you can see proximity to ground upset the equilibrium,but when
raised
to 70 feet the length aproached the 7/4 WL and probably woulD have
finished up around there if I could raise it in excess of a 1/2WL.
Wire used was #18 insulated house wire.
The antenna has multi resonances with the resistive resonances
increasing in value until it was a maximum at 160 M.
Snow has arrived so I will stay with this form until spring
while working on it to make it an ALL FREQUENCY GAUSSIAN
DIRECTIVE ANTENNA.
Covered the element with plastic sheeting because freezing
rain would cling to the windings and make it heavy.

Got any opinions or comments that could add to my understanding
of my present antenna? Don't mind contraversy as any discussion
tends to shed light in unexpected corners.
Best regards
Art- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Whooops
I made an error. The original construction was four(4) units of
windings, not three(3). Each assembly consisted of eight (8)
wires of insulated #18 wire of a length of twenty eight (28)
feet which gave a anti resonance at 160 M.
Two (2)more assemblies were added to get a std resonance at
seventy (70) feet. Note each length of windings is free to
move laterally without entanglement because of contra winding,
tho winding helix angles change somewhat relative to each other .
Thus gain will be a few percent less than optimum.
Sorry to have mislead you if you are comparing coil lengths
and wire lengths.
Best regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ...xg (uk)
Now out in the snow to find the wires for the rotator as they
go underground and connect them together.

On 5 Dec, 09:01, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote The resultant vector of all vectors involved with radiation can
NEVER be at right angles to the axis of a radiator. PERIOD

___________

Are you thinking that your statement above applies to the radiation from the
vertical monopoles used by commercial AM broadcast stations ?

Their performance has been accurately and carefully measured going back 70+
years, and the "resultant vector" of their radiation at right angles to the
radiator axis certainly is not zero.

RF

So you are back again. Read the posting several times from now on.
I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT ZERO RADIATION!
I am close to plonking you because of your twisted reading
just wastes my time.

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
http://www.w5dxp.com/travstnd.gif

That graph page is beyond simple amusement; it is hilarious.

I'm glad you find it amusing, Gene. Now please explain
why EZNEC came up with that data based on the EZNEC
files that you are free to download and analyze.

All I did was simulate a coil using the helix feature
in EZNEC. For standing-waves, I left the coil un-
terminated. For traveling-waves, I terminated the
coil in close to its characteristic impedance. The
graphs are the exact data reported by EZNEC so
W7EL can be blamed for the results, not I.

Cecil,

OK, here is what I find amusing.

* EZNEC does not know or care about "standing waves" and "traveling
waves". As has been explained many times, the NEC-based simulation tools
simply look at the total current, without making any philosophical value
judgments about the mobility of the waves. It is clear that you have
loaded some sort of conditions into EZNEC that you believe represent
standing waves and traveling waves. However, the argument becomes
completely circular at that point, as you have loaded the conditions
that give exactly the results you desire. If there is a hidden "wave
type" parameter in EZNEC, please let us know. I will humbly retract my
criticism.

* You show those lovely equations for wave types, and then completely
avoid any further mention of the "t" factor. Yes, it is common to omit
the e^(jwt) term, but in this case that term is the entire point of the
discussion. You show something called "magnitude", although it is not
stated just what that means. It appears to be the maximum envelope of
the current for all times, but why that is tied to phase is not very clear.

* The comment "No phase information in the phase" is a real classic. Of
course there is phase information in the phase. What sort of double-talk
are you engaging in? Zero is a real number. The actual issue is one that
continues to elude you and many others. Phase needs to be carefully
defined for the case at hand. There are many definitions in use. It
would appear that you have chosen two different phases for the left and
right sides of your web page. You apparently have plotted the EZNEC
results shown on the lower portion of the page, but you have not
explained how those results connect to your equations.

In summary, if this page is intended to resolve any serious debate, it
does not. This stuff is already fully understood by everyone in the debate.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Cecil Moore wrote:
AI4QJ wrote:
... it is plain and simple "intuitive" once you know that current
changes along the electrical "degree length" in an unloaded antenna,
the same should happen in the degree length loaded coil.

Unfortunately, both sides cannot be right but both sides
are still illustrated as fact in the ARRL Antenna Book.
There's one graphic that shows the drop in amplitude
through a loading coil and another that shows no change.
Apparently, the ARRL doesn't know what happens so they
show both possibilities as technically correct.

Also, as indicated, the pictures do say 1000 words and it also looks
like W8JI ended up agreeing with you after you pointed out the same
effect at "ON4UN's Low Band DXing", 3rd Edition, on page 9-34.

Unfortunately, it is rumored that W8JI has talked ON4UN
into changing that in the latest edition. I emailed ON4UN
about it but got no reply.

It has been changed. There is no longer any discussion of "degrees",
only "current".

73,
Gene
W4SZ

"art" wrote
I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT ZERO RADIATION!
I am close to plonking you because of your twisted reading
just wastes my time.
_____________

art,

"The resultant vector of all vectors involved with radiation"
is ONE vector. If it "can NEVER be at right angles to the axis
of a radiator" then how can a monopole have any radiation
in such directions?

RF

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:43:11 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
Using what probes?

Toroidal current pickup coils designed by W7EL
with the standard voltage probes.

What size 600 ohm non-inductive resistors?

On 5 Dec, 09:49, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT ZERO RADIATION!
I am close to plonking you because of your twisted reading
just wastes my time.

_____________

art,

"The resultant vector of all vectors involved with radiation"
is ONE vector. If it "can NEVER be at right angles to the axis
of a radiator" then how can a monopole have any radiation
in such directions?

RF

I have had it with you and your senior moments and misquotes.
I asked you to stop so you had fair warning
PLONK. Enough is enough
Art Unwin KB9MZ....xg (uk)

Art wrote:
The resultant vector of all vectors involved with radiation can NEVER be
at right angles to the axis of the radiator. PERIOD."

A radial mode helix can and does work, despite Art`s apparent
disputation.

The radial mode helix acts as a stacked horizontal loop antenna. Hams
routinely use horizontal loops for more bandwidth with less drivepoint
resistance variation in a centerfed half wavelength of wire. When the
length of wire goes from 0,5 WL to 0.6 WL the dipole increases its
resistance from 70 ohms to 140 ohms. The loop feedpoint increases from 5
ohms to 7 ohms (theat`s less than a double as in the dipole. This
information is found in Figs 7-19 and 8-14 of Bailey`s "TV and Other
Receiving Antennas".

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Art wrote:
"The resultant vector of all vectors involved with radiation can NEVER
be at right angles to the axis of the radiator. PERIOD."

I`ve already defended the radial mode helix, but think of almost any
simple antenna. Doesn`t the half-wave dipole dradiate principally at
right angles to its axis?

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:38:40 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:

PLONK. Enough is enough
Writing PLONK is about as effective as trying to work DX by talking
into the back of a microphone Arthur.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC