Art wrote:
"Thus modern day computors provide the answer as a full wavelength
radiator that is at an angle to the earth of just under 80 degrees."

In the real world we try to get maximum results with minimum investmennt
in effort and materials. An unbalanced 1/4-wave or a balanced 1/2-wave
seems appropriate.

As far as angles go, polarization is the direction of the electric
field, usually horizontal or vertical for mechanical as well as
electrical purposes.

You can take Kraus to the bank. Check his index for "Mutual Impedance"
of paralleled dipoles or echelon antennas. Better yet, you likely have
experience with trials of cross-polarization of VHF or UHF antennas. You
have seen the havoc cross-polarization causes. Now, is there any angle
between fully aligned and completely misaligned where we discover a
magic peak? Of course not.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On 5 Dec, 20:33, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art wrote:

"Thus modern day computors provide the answer as a full wavelength
radiator that is at an angle to the earth of just under 80 degrees."

In the real world we try to get maximum results with minimum investmennt
in effort and materials. An unbalanced 1/4-wave or a balanced 1/2-wave
seems appropriate.

As far as angles go, polarization is the direction of the electric
field, usually horizontal or vertical for mechanical as well as
electrical purposes.

You can take Kraus to the bank. Check his index for "Mutual Impedance"
of paralleled dipoles or echelon antennas. Better yet, you likely have
experience with trials of cross-polarization of VHF or UHF antennas. You
have seen the havoc cross-polarization causes. Now, is there any angle
between fully aligned and completely misaligned where we discover a
magic peak? Of course not.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

O.K. you WIN Richard. You run so many different routes that
I can't keep up with you. You deny the validity of computor programs
and Roy sulks because none of his programs have the optimiser feature
which is the easiest way of solving the question.
You can place the radiator where ever you want to get the results
that you would like to see.So you don't trust computor programs,
programmers or you just never tried to use them?
You can now get back to argueing with Cecil on coil currents
which will allow some more disconnecting reading from Terman
of yesteryear. There is nothing more to be said regarding
the resultant vector of a radiator's active vectors which is
the basic issue that I was discussing in the first place.
Hopefully you will recover by morning and look on life
in a different manner.
Art

Art wrote:
"O.K. you win Richard."

It isn`t a competition. It`s a discussion. Art is aware that the
electric field vector is at right angles to the magnetic field vector
and that both are at right angles with the direction of propagation.

When the receiver`s electric vector is aligned with the transmitter`s,
their magnetic vectors are in alignment too. Communications couldn`t be
better to the best of my knowledge. With circular or elliptical
polarization, we worry about right hand or left hand polarizations, but
I`m assuming linear polarizations. There is a wave tilt associated with
propagation along a lossy surface, but I`ll be darned if I can grasp
Art`s tilt factor.

Best regards, RRichard Harrison, KB5WZI

On 5 Dec, 22:27, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art wrote:

"O.K. you win Richard."

It isn`t a competition. It`s a discussion. Art is aware that the
electric field vector is at right angles to the magnetic field vector
and that both are at right angles with the direction of propagation.

When the receiver`s electric vector is aligned with the transmitter`s,
their magnetic vectors are in alignment too. Communications couldn`t be
better to the best of my knowledge. With circular or elliptical
polarization, we worry about right hand or left hand polarizations, but
I`m assuming linear polarizations. There is a wave tilt associated with
propagation along a lossy surface, but I`ll be darned if I can grasp
Art`s tilt factor.

Best regards, RRichard Harrison, KB5WZI

That is because you quote outdated technology and have lost the means
of deduction for yourself. You are not alone. Apparently the group
itself are in the same boat. Somehow it seems a bit rediculous that
we have a group for discussing antennas where NONE can deduce the
most efficient angle of a radiator with respect to ground when
desiring maximum horizontal polarisation gain with the majority
having possesion of an "american" degree!
It seems rediculous that a argument on just a coil can go on for years
with nothing to show for it other than talking about it forever
and displaying their ever growing testerone level in a fashion that
pushes aside all other discussion. If you were willing to accept
computor
aids in your life and learn how to use them you could leapfrog
into the present age. But you are to lazy and to old and unwilling to
change
thus relying on a education that is over fifty years old.
You just cannot have reasonable communication on antennas or
anything else by disregarding present science and substitute insults
in the place of knoweledge ,or for that matter, quoting a books
writings
not pertinant to the subject at hand.It makes no sense for anybody
that
is interested in antennas is not interested or care about any radiator
other than those that are planar . That also goes for the naval
academy in
Washington and NASA and other institutions.
Art

art wrote:

...
Washington and NASA and other institutions.
Art

My mother 78+ has trouble with her cell phone ... I shudder at teaching
her the ins-and-outs of a programmable calculator ... long hand
calculations take time.

Some are stuck with antenna modeling programs ... indeed, a tribute to
them for mastering those. The world will not change at a snap of your
fingers.

I have a smith chart program, that is enough for me--Cecil does it by hand!

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
I have a smith chart program, that is enough for me--Cecil does it by hand!

Are you talking about the Smith Chart or sex?
I have MicroSmith and use it often. Unfortunately,
I cannot do a MicroSmith screen capture with
Windows XP so I am handicapped in passing on
the results.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:

...
Are you talking about the Smith Chart or sex?
I have MicroSmith and use it often. Unfortunately,
I cannot do a MicroSmith screen capture with
Windows XP so I am handicapped in passing on
the results.

Should be able to hit "print screen" button, open paint and paste the
image in, then save the file and attach it to an email/post ...
sometimes the print screen button is used in conjunction with a
"function button", especially on laptops.

If all that fails, a good utility for screen capture is mwsnap, you can
find it he

http://www.mirekw.com/winfreeware/mwsnap.html

Regards,
JS

Art wrote:
"That is because you quote outdated technology and have lost the means
of deduction for yourself."

O.K, Not much technical content in that posting, nor hint of what Art
hopes to do with an 80 degree tilt. Maximizing horizontal polarisation
is another mystery. Vertical polarization is the way to launch
groundwaves and it will be so 100 years from today. Modern technology is
unlikely to improve the FCC approved antenna and grounding systems used
in AM broadcasting, thanks to RCA`s B., L., & E. (1927).

The coil argument has persisted a long time but it has provoked some
searching into the behavior of inductance. W8JI may be on to something
but he may not have it exactly right. Terman and Lenkurt have the TWT
down, as invented in England (1943) but its coil is stretched out so
that a foot long coil only has a dozen turns and lacks tight coupling
which might work as W8JI describes.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On 6 Dec, 13:40, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art wrote:

"That is because you quote outdated technology and have lost the means
of deduction for yourself."

O.K, Not much technical content in that posting, nor hint of what Art
hopes to do with an 80 degree tilt. Maximizing horizontal polarisation
is another mystery.

Hmm You put a stake in the ground when you stated that you can take
Kraus to the bank. Have you changed your mind regarding a tilt angle?
Why do you state that maximising horizontal polarisation is a mystery
if you are now finally aware of antenna tilt?
As far as maximising specific polarisation apparently airports need
to devise such a system to find wind shear systems. I suspect that
medical systems would appreciate a clearer focus. But describing
this effect to fill a hole that is present in industry it is just
something that was revealed when adding time varient and radiators
to Gaussian law. It forced me to consider the equilibrium effects
within the arbitary gravitational field which thus demanded a full
wave length radiator and not to accept fractional lengths.
The same trail also showed me that an array in equilibrium provides
stacked gain tho using a single feed and again the tilt angle comes
into play. These determinations along the path of the trail showed
that the helix angle that Kraus found by experimentation was a
reflection of the radiator tilt revealed while on the trail.
This tilt angle is given by all computor programs some thing I
was unaware of and where all people on this group are in denial.
The same trail leads to helix antennas that are in equilibrium
which by following the trail provides me with a rotatable
directive antenna which also provides a path to a near point
radiation system predicted by a russian scientist as being
possible. What I intend to do with the radiator tilt is of no
concern to me or that the trail's final destination is
Maxwell's law which is thus now described in deeper detail.
This emphasises that old chinese saying It is n ot the
destination that counts but the journey taken to get there.
You can mock the idea of a tilt and any program that portrays
it but for the young and inquisitive it is quite exciting.
When we are gone and forgotten new wheels will roll on
this same trail and there will be an understanding as how the
Japanese did not have a yagi antenna during the last war.
This was the unwillingnes to change despite the obvious.
If you haven't got a computor or unwilling to address
computor programs then ask a friend to check it out for you.
Adding this to Terman could possibly allow you to leapfrog
the world with respect to radiation.Or you can ignore it and
pass on restfully and without concern to your final destiny.
Your choice
Art
Art




Vertical polarization is the way to launch
groundwaves and it will be so 100 years from today. Modern technology is
unlikely to improve the FCC approved antenna and grounding systems used
in AM broadcasting, thanks to RCA`s B., L., & E. (1927).

The coil argument has persisted a long time but it has provoked some
searching into the behavior of inductance. W8JI may be on to something
but he may not have it exactly right. Terman and Lenkurt have the TWT
down, as invented in England (1943) but its coil is stretched out so
that a foot long coil only has a dozen turns and lacks tight coupling
which might work as W8JI describes.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI