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

Gene Fuller wrote:
. . .
* 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 are of course completely right, and I've explained this to Cecil
several times. But he seems to have difficulty with the concept of
current as being simply the rate of charge flow. EZNEC does not, either
in internal calculations or in reporting, split the current into any
kind of "traveling wave", "standing wave", or any other kind of wave
components.

Anyone interested in the details of EZNEC calculations can find them in
the NEC-2 manual which is available on line.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote:
EZNEC does not, either
in internal calculations or in reporting, split the current into any
kind of "traveling wave", "standing wave", or any other kind of wave
components.

Sorry, you are wrong, Roy. EZNEC faithfully reports
traveling wave current when reflected wave current
is not present. If you had looked at the file I
sent to you instead of threatening to refund my
money, you would know that.

Model a rhombic antenna. EZNEC reports the traveling
wave amplitude and phase.

Model a lossless stub. EZNEC reports the standing
wave amplitude and phase.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Gene Fuller wrote:
* EZNEC does not know or care about "standing waves" and "traveling
waves".

Exactly!!! That's why it is a good tool for such. EZNEC is
not biased. EZNEC reports standing-wave current when only it
exists. EZNEC reports traveling-wave current when only it
exists.

Phase needs to be carefully defined for the case at hand.

In this case, phase is defined by EZNEC. It is the phase of
the total current referenced to the reference phase of the
source.

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.

Of course, you knew all of this all the time and there's
nothing new here. That's why we have been arguing for
three years about it. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com