Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 3, 5:49 pm, "Tom Donaly" wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: K7ITM wrote: Cecil, I posed two very specific examples for you to work out to show us that you can actually correctly find the phase shift for travelling waves, as you promised you could and would. Sorry, Tom, when I came to the word "superconductor", I stopped reading your posting. Please try to stick to the real world of amateur radio next time. Anyone at anytime can come up with some impossible esoteric example that defies solution. Such examples are a "vexations of the spirit" and I don't waste the little time I have left on such nonsense. Please go find another victim for your tarbaby. In other words, you can't do it. Why don't you just say so? 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH It's his tarbaby, not mine. My description was just for an inductively loaded antenna, and a capacitively loaded antenna. I was simply describing a method by which I could make a very small high-Q coil; the small capacitor can be had from DigiKey. The obvious question is, does the size of the reactive loading component matter? Then, if so, why, and to what degree? What is it that loads (tunes) the antenna? Is it primarily the inductance of the coil, or is it parasitic effects such as the coil's capacitance to the outside world? Would the antenna be properly loaded with pure inductance, or does it _require_ the parasitic capacitance of the coil to the outside world? By the way, there's another way I can place an inductive reactance at a point in the antenna, in a way that it's not coupled to the outside world: I can make the antenna conductor be the outside of a piece of coaxial cable, and use the coaxial inside as a shorted stub which reflects a pretty good (fairly high Q) inductive reactance back to a particular point such as a quarter of the antenna length back from each end, where the stub connects across a gap in the outer conductor. Can I use such an inductive reactance to tune the antenna? Will there then be a difference in current at each end of the gap across which that reactance connects? If there is not, and we're dealing with a standing-wave antenna, how do we account for all the "electrical degrees" we need to--or do we really even need to be counting "electrical degrees"? (Joseph Boyer's wonderful article, "The Antenna-Transmission Line Analog," is highly recommended here...) Others are welcome to ponder all that while Cecil tries to unstick himself from his tarbaby. Cheers, Tom |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
K7ITM wrote:
Others are welcome to ponder all that while Cecil tries to unstick himself from his tarbaby. It's your tarbaby, Tom, not mine. When you can tell me what's the difference between a duck, I will tackle your equally ridiculous questions. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cecil Moore wrote:
K7ITM wrote: Others are welcome to ponder all that while Cecil tries to unstick himself from his tarbaby. It's your tarbaby, Tom, not mine. When you can tell me what's the difference between a duck, I will tackle your equally ridiculous questions. Perhaps, said in olde' english it would gain more of your interest/attention--"Shakespearian terms?" rofol Cecil, don't take the whole world seriously, where would be the fun? JS |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Smith wrote:
Cecil, don't take the whole world seriously, where would be the fun? I'm sorry, John, the difference between a duck is serious business. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 3, 8:34 pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
.... It's your tarbaby, Tom, not mine. Hey I'M not the one who's made well over a hundred postings in this thread, man. Can the delusional see that they are? Have a good life; I'll try in the future to not engage you in meaningful discussions about your, um, tarbabies. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 18:29:24 -0800 (PST), K7ITM wrote:
I can make the antenna conductor be the outside of a piece of coaxial cable, and use the coaxial inside as a shorted stub which reflects a pretty good (fairly high Q) inductive reactance back to a particular point such as a quarter of the antenna length back from each end, where the stub connects across a gap in the outer conductor. Can I use such an inductive reactance to tune the antenna? Will there then be a difference in current at each end of the gap across which that reactance connects? Hi Tom, Interesting proposition. I like it. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 4, 10:23 am, Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 18:29:24 -0800 (PST), K7ITM wrote: I can make the antenna conductor be the outside of a piece of coaxial cable, and use the coaxial inside as a shorted stub which reflects a pretty good (fairly high Q) inductive reactance back to a particular point such as a quarter of the antenna length back from each end, where the stub connects across a gap in the outer conductor. Can I use such an inductive reactance to tune the antenna? Will there then be a difference in current at each end of the gap across which that reactance connects? Hi Tom, Interesting proposition. I like it. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi Richard, Note that it's also possible to make the stub in the form of a helical resonator operated below resonance--that is, a loading coil that's shielded by the tubular conductor whose outside surface is the antenna. A problem with using plain coax is that the length is prohibitive. For example, if you make an 80-foot long dipole from RG-213-size coax, you find that you need about 550 ohms reactance at points a quarter of the total length in from the ends, to get it to resonate at 3.9MHz. But using a shorted stub of 50 ohm line requires about 85 electrical degrees of line. Even with solid polyethylene dielectric, that's 39 feet of line. Ooops. We only have 20 feet to work with. Lengthen the antenna to, say, 120 feet, and the required reactance drops to a low enough value to be practical to do with a shorted stub co-axial with the antenna wire, but at that point, why bother? You'd only have to add a few feet of wire to get the antenna to resonate without inductive loading. Mostly I find value in thinking about things like this because they make more clear what's really important: it's primarily the inductive reactance that tunes the antenna; the parasitic capacitance from a loading coil to the outside world, which is what causes it to behave like a helical delay line, is of much lower importance in determining the antenna tuning. In a long antenna that's capacitively loaded, the capacitors can have negligible parasitic series inductance and shunt capacitance to the outside world, but they still strongly affect the antenna loading. Of course, the closer to the end of the antenna you put a large loading coil, the more effect its capacitance will have. In the limit, you can dispense with the coil and just add a capacitive hat after all. Even modest size conductive balls on the ends of a thin- wire dipole will have a significant effect on the resonance. Cheers, Tom |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|