On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:58:11 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:
W8JI made a gross error in his measurement and
then tried to rationalize the impossible result.

Given the volume of smoke generated here (over an issue that was long
ago laid in its coffin), did he violate your patented technique?

You and Art seem intent on collecting on a bet, or a debt, or
otherwise mooching validation, because if you two had such
dead-to-rights positions, they wouldn't require exhumation from the
grave to prop the corpses on soap box pedestals as resurrected proof.

I see Cecil's temporarily run out of steam on his alternative theories
of transmission line operation and so has fallen back to his equally
imaginative pseudo-science of loading coils. I made and posted careful
measurements on this group long ago of a physically small coil to refute
some of the stranger claims being made. I can only describe as
disgusting the ducking, weaving, hemming, and hawing Cecil and Yuri went
through in trying to predict using their imaginative theories what the
results would be. Of course, like any competent fortune tellers, once
the results were given they claimed to have known all along. It's all
there in the archives for anybody who has the stomach for it. I don't.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote:
I see Cecil's temporarily run out of steam on his alternative theories
of transmission line operation and so has fallen back to his equally
imaginative pseudo-science of loading coils. I made and posted careful
measurements on this group long ago of a physically small coil to refute
some of the stranger claims being made.

Well, the subject was 75m bugcatcher loading coils", so your
choice of a "physically small coil" was already somewhat of
a straw man.

And Roy, you made the same mental blunder in your measurements
that Tom made. I have explained it to you before and you have
so far refused to listen or even read my postings so here it
is once again. Everyone is invited to think about what I am
saying and agree or attempt to refute it. Point by point:

A 1/4WL monopole over ground is known to be 90 degrees long.
The phase of the current changes by only a few degrees from
feedpoint to tip. How much phase shift (delay) in the current
would we measure in 30 degrees of a monopole? Answer: Only
one or two degrees. Why is there only a small number of degrees
of phase shift (delay) in the current in 30 degrees of monopole?
Because it is *standing-wave current* that is being used for
the measurement and the phase barely changes over the entire
monopole length.

EZNEC agrees. A 1/4WL monopole has 5.67 degrees of phase shift
in the current from segment 1 to segment 33 even though the
antenna is 90 degrees long and therefore has an inherent delay
of 90 degrees from feedpoint to tip. Standing-wave current
cannot be used to measure the delay through a wire.

So can that same *standing-wave current* be used to measure
the phase shift (delay) through a coil? Answer: No, standing
wave current cannot be used to measure the phase shift (delay)
through a wire or through a coil because the phase hardly
changes no matter how long is the delay through the coil or
through the wire (assuming coil and wire are 1/2WL).

Roy and Tom both used standing-wave current to try to measure
the delay through a coil. Such an attempt is doomed to failure
for obvious reasons and is a violation of the scientific method.

STANDING WAVE CURRENT CANNOT BE USED TO MEASURE PHASE SHIFTS
IN A WIRE OR IN A COIL BECAUSE STANDING WAVE CURRENT HAS
ESSENTIALLY NO PHASE SHIFT! THERE IS NO PHASE INFORMATION
IN STANDING WAVES!

There is absolutely no correlation between the phase of
standing-wave current and the delay through a coil or
through a wire.

What is the phase shift through a coil at self-resonance?
Answer: It is known to be 90 degrees at the first self-
resonant frequency, i.e. 180 degrees end-to-end.

What is the measured phase shift through that self-resonant
coil at the self-resonant frequency using standing-wave
current? Answer: That measured phase shift will be very
close to zero, nowhere near the known 90 degrees.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On 29 Nov, 08:36, Cecil Moore wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote:
I see Cecil's temporarily run out of steam on his alternative theories
of transmission line operation and so has fallen back to his equally
imaginative pseudo-science of loading coils. I made and posted careful
measurements on this group long ago of a physically small coil to refute
some of the stranger claims being made.

Well, the subject was 75m bugcatcher loading coils", so your
choice of a "physically small coil" was already somewhat of
a straw man.

And Roy, you made the same mental blunder in your measurements
that Tom made. I have explained it to you before and you have
so far refused to listen or even read my postings so here it
is once again. Everyone is invited to think about what I am
saying and agree or attempt to refute it. Point by point:

A 1/4WL monopole over ground is known to be 90 degrees long.
The phase of the current changes by only a few degrees from
feedpoint to tip. How much phase shift (delay) in the current
would we measure in 30 degrees of a monopole? Answer: Only
one or two degrees. Why is there only a small number of degrees
of phase shift (delay) in the current in 30 degrees of monopole?
Because it is *standing-wave current* that is being used for
the measurement and the phase barely changes over the entire
monopole length.

EZNEC agrees. A 1/4WL monopole has 5.67 degrees of phase shift
in the current from segment 1 to segment 33 even though the
antenna is 90 degrees long and therefore has an inherent delay
of 90 degrees from feedpoint to tip. Standing-wave current
cannot be used to measure the delay through a wire.

So can that same *standing-wave current* be used to measure
the phase shift (delay) through a coil? Answer: No, standing
wave current cannot be used to measure the phase shift (delay)
through a wire or through a coil because the phase hardly
changes no matter how long is the delay through the coil or
through the wire (assuming coil and wire are 1/2WL).

Roy and Tom both used standing-wave current to try to measure
the delay through a coil. Such an attempt is doomed to failure
for obvious reasons and is a violation of the scientific method.

STANDING WAVE CURRENT CANNOT BE USED TO MEASURE PHASE SHIFTS
IN A WIRE OR IN A COIL BECAUSE STANDING WAVE CURRENT HAS
ESSENTIALLY NO PHASE SHIFT! THERE IS NO PHASE INFORMATION
IN STANDING WAVES!

There is absolutely no correlation between the phase of
standing-wave current and the delay through a coil or
through a wire.

What is the phase shift through a coil at self-resonance?
Answer: It is known to be 90 degrees at the first self-
resonant frequency, i.e. 180 degrees end-to-end.

What is the measured phase shift through that self-resonant
coil at the self-resonant frequency using standing-wave
current? Answer: That measured phase shift will be very
close to zero, nowhere near the known 90 degrees.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

IF the coil windings are all exposed then I agree with you Cecil
But a dead horse will never get upregardless of the amount of
whipping.
Regards
Art

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

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"A 1/4WL monopole over ground is known to be 90 degrees long. The phase
of the current changes by only a few degrees from feedpoint to tip. How
much phase shift (delay) in the current would we measure in 30 degrees
of a monopole? Answer: Only one or two degrees. Why is there only a
small number of degrees of phase shift (delay) in the current in 30
degrees of monopole? Because it is "standing-wave current" that is being
used for the measurement and the phase barely changes over the entire
monopole length."

The current distribution and phase along a 1/2-wave dipole have the same
characteristics except that the monopole`s image exists in the other
half of the dipole. Figure 14-2 on page 464 of the 3rd edition of Kraus`
"Antennas" shows the absence of significant phase change just as Cecil
describes above.

Then, if you examine Figure 14-12 on page 474, you`ll notice the solid
lines of the traveling wave progressing in opposite directions versus
the stair step dashed lines representing the standing wave abruptly
shifting its phase by 180 degrees at 1/2-wave intervals. This is
standard transmission line-antenna knowledge and supports Cecil`s
statement above.

You can take Kraus to the bank. I don`t know what all the fuss is about.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:
You can take Kraus to the bank. I don`t know what all the fuss is about.

The fuss is about some people using standing-wave current,
whose phase is virtually meaningless, to make phase
measurements and report those measurements as meaningful
"facts" thus creating new old wives' tales that amateur
radio doesn't need.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Richard Clark wrote:
You and Art seem intent on collecting on a bet, or a debt, or
otherwise mooching validation, because if you two had such
dead-to-rights positions, they wouldn't require exhumation from the
grave to prop the corpses on soap box pedestals as resurrected proof.

On the contrary, Richard, old wives' tales sometimes
die hard. It's like water wearing away a stone.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:02:30 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:
You and Art seem intent on collecting on a bet, or a debt, or
otherwise mooching validation, because if you two had such
dead-to-rights positions, they wouldn't require exhumation from the
grave to prop the corpses on soap box pedestals as resurrected proof.

On the contrary, Richard, old wives' tales sometimes
die hard. It's like water wearing away a stone.

More mooching validation. You guys could collect more nickels if you
learned to doff your caps instead of engaging in your incessant
muttering.

Richard Clark wrote:
More mooching validation. You guys could collect more nickels if you
learned to doff your caps instead of engaging in your incessant
muttering.

The same could have been said of Galileo. Do you
suggest that technical absurdities go unchallenged?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com