Part three of many
 

Part two I finished up talking about eddy currents that form a
magnetic field in opposition
to the primrary magnetic field. It is this eddy current that is
considered a loss in the building of transformers
and forms as a circulating current which can penetrate quite deeply in
a transformer. To cut down this loss a transformer is made of
laminated steel parts bound together so the depth of the eddy current
is confined to a single laminate to control its penetration or skin
depth. Eddy currents formed on an antenna are also circulartory such
that the current flow is at right angles to the applied current flow.
So the conception of skin depth of a radiator as being some sort of
high resistance or corrosion skin is not quite correct. What we
actually have is a force or current running into the side of another
current flow so that the summation of such is deflected sideways and
upwards in three dimensional terms.
As I mentioned earlier this eddy field or magnetic field comes into
contact with the magnetic field of the particle and where the particle
is ejected together with a spin applied to it so it can maintain a
straight trajectory. Remember, the particle is extremely small so it
takes only a small amount of energy to send it on its way. For those
who are aware of the magnetic elevation experiments the elevation
force is a fraction more than the gravity force in the opposite
direction and as many know to keep an article stable while elevated it
is difficult to preventing the elevated article from turning over
which is particle spin. So when the particle is ejected from the
antenna surface it has spin so that it can maintain a straight line
trajectory as well as the ability to negotiate thru areas affected by
gravitational pull which is nullified by the upthrust of the elevation
force created by the magnetic field of the eddy currents. However
these ejected particles passing from one antenna to another does not
explain the transmission of intelligence so something else has to
occur otherwise we are stymied. Well remember that Newtons laws of
action and reaction means there is a reactionary force on the
radiator from the ejection of the particles is similar to what you
see at the swimming pool with a spring board. A diver jumps on the
spring board which is a downward force and the reactionary force is
that applied by the spring board to the diver so in the case of an
antenna it must move in a reaction to the downwards motion and you
then see a repartition of what you saw with the spring board where
after the diver has left it continues to oscillate for a short time.
But in the case of antenna another particle quickly takes the place of
the ejected particle for a place to rest such that the antenna
oscillation continually takes place over a short length of time. To
fully understand this repartition of ejection and replacement with
respect to the natural frequency and time factors we must now
investigate further the electrical circuit that simulates such
action .This is called a Tank circuit where the energy supplied
sloshes back and forth between a capacitor and a inductor and where
the capacitor itself cannot radiate and the inductor can cause
radiation in two different ways ie. when the field is being generated
and when it is dissapating for each full cycle or period of the tank
circuit operation. This represents the full sinosoidal of the applied
alternating current when applied not to a fractional WL antenna but a
full WL antenna because a period represents the repetitive function of
BOTH phases of the applied current.
More on the Tank circuit operation in the next Part four. If you can
get ahead of the game and study the operation of a tanks circuit you
will see it is not as simple as it appears because it involves time
constants,
voltage multiplication as well as phase change each of which is
important in terms of sequence to provide
for the ejection of particles . I may have to Google to get the
sequence correct ie copy the description or refer to a URL for
simplicity
Art Unwin
unwinantennas.com/

Part three of many
 

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

[text deleted]


Art Unwin
unwinantennas.com/

I went to your website but I didn't see any specific antenna information,
like a ham might want to build a new type of antenna, to try it out.

I saw a write-up of an H-F antenna with elements wound into a spiral and
wondered if that might be yours, as you speak of physically small antennas
(fraction of an expected resonant size).

Pls advise in group. TNX.

Part three of many
 

On Jul 9, 12:55 am, "Clark Kent" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

[text deleted]

Art Unwin
unwinantennas.com/

I went to your website but I didn't see any specific antenna information,
like a ham might want to build a new type of antenna, to try it out.

I saw a write-up of an H-F antenna with elements wound into a spiral and
wondered if that might be yours, as you speak of physically small antennas
(fraction of an expected resonant size).

Pls advise in group. TNX.

A helix is an excellent example to talk about to arrive at small full
wave antennas.
When you follow the reasoning of the extension to Gaussian law of
statics which makes
it dynamic it brings to the surface that a radiator can be any size or
shape as long as it is in equilibrium.
So to meet the intent of both laws which are now the same, we must not
impose any lumped circuits
while making our antenna. Now a helix is a fractional wave antenna
with added capacitive and inductive
lumped loads, thus to follow the intent of Maxwell's law we must first
extend the antenna to a full wave form
while at the same time cancelling the added lumped loads. So if we
start with a half wave helix in standard form we have to
continue the element in a down ward direction where we then reach the
starting point. Doing this first completes the circuit to a full wave
and secondly it cancels the pre imposed capacitive and inductive
lumped load that are inherrent with a standard helix antenna PLUS we
have removed the need for a ground plane as the completed antenna is
now a full instead of fractional circuit. Now instead of winding with
a helix angle of some ten degrees plus we can now
push the windings close together and then tip the new antenna to a 10
degree plus angle to put the whole thing in equilibrium by replacing
the angular force represented by the form pitch that we removed by
losing the pitch of the winding. Actually this works out quite well as
you can now laquer the assembly where it has no voids and is quite
strong.
By the way my antennas are always of a full wavelength which by virtue
of its reduced volume then becomes a small FULL wave antennas to
retain the inherrent efficiencies of full wave antennas in equilibrium
as well as resonant.
Allow me to continu on this line of thinking. It should now be seen
that an array is also shrunken not only by the shortened elements but
also by the fact that element spacings conform to the equilibrium of
the array as a whole! We then have an array that does not have to have
elements at certain distance from each other ad infirnitum but just
two elements much closer together where all radiation is accounted
for!
Hope the above helps you out but I do expect howls of resistance from
others as they wish to protect the notion that "all is known about
antennas" thus this posting is sacrelidge and must be negated at all
costs. And some others ofcourse will vehemently reject the notion of
the WEAK force being revealed by a ham where Einstein could no so for
me the end of the World is aproaching or at the least the magnetic
pole of our Earth has started a full rotation!
Cheers and beers
Art Unwin KB9MZ....xg
unwinantennas.com/

Part three of many
 

Art wrote:
"---thus to follow the intent of Maxwell`s law we must first extend the
antenna to a full wave form."

False. All we need is resonance to eliminate reactance which otherwise
would limit current in the antenna . First resonance in the thin
straight 1/2-wave dipole ia about 5% less than a physical 1/2
wavelength. A full wavelength straight antenna has characteristics
completely different from its first-resonance cousin.

A small diameter coil radiates perpendicularly to its axis. As a
radiator its effect is related to the coil`s length not the length of
wire on the form. Wire length is related to resistance to r-f current
and therefore to loss in an antenna containing coils. That is the source
of skepticism of the Unwin antenna. Resistance-loaded antennas have
proven useful in situations demanding great frequency bandwidth so Art
may have something of value after all.

My ARRL Antenna Book (20th ed.) says on page 16-13:
"The general approach has been to use a coil nade from very heavy wire
(#14 or larger), with length-to-diameter ratios as high as 21. British
experimenters have reported good results with 8-foot overall lengths on
the 1.8 and 3.5 MHz bands."

Bill Orr wrote on page 78 of "All About Vertical Antennas":
"In general, a half-wavelength of no,14 Formvar-coated wire is spirally
wrapped on the form, with turn spacing approximately eqial to the wire
diameter. This amount of wire will approximate a quarter-wave resonance.
Orr`s book was first printed in 1986. Unwin has a problem with novelty.

Best regards, Richard harrison, KB5WZI

Part three of many
 

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Jul 9, 12:55 am, "Clark Kent" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message


...

[text deleted]

Art Unwin
unwinantennas.com/

I went to your website but I didn't see any specific antenna
information,
like a ham might want to build a new type of antenna, to try it out.

[text deleted

A helix is an excellent example to talk about to arrive at small full
wave antennas.
When you follow the reasoning of the extension to Gaussian law of
statics which makes
it dynamic it brings to the surface that a radiator can be any size or
shape as long as it is in equilibrium.

[ text deleted]

By the way my antennas are always of a full wavelength which by virtue
of its reduced volume then becomes a small FULL wave antennas to
retain the inherrent efficiencies of full wave antennas in equilibrium
as well as resonant.

Allow me to continu on this line of thinking. It should now be seen
that an array is also shrunken not only by the shortened elements but
also by the fact that element spacings conform to the equilibrium of
the array as a whole! We then have an array that does not have to have
elements at certain distance from each other ad infirnitum but just
two elements much closer together where all radiation is accounted
for!
Hope the above helps you out.

[text deleted]

Cheers and beers
Art Unwin KB9MZ

Well, I'm good with the cheers and beers, but no way am I close
to clipping and snipping (wire) to make an Unwin Antenna.

What do they look like? Photos? Diagrams? Crayola drawings?

Don't get me wrong, OM, theory is important but there's no textbook
that loads up at 7220 KHz. Show me some metal parts.

Part three of many
 

On Jul 9, 8:10 pm, "Clark Kent" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

... On Jul 9, 12:55 am, "Clark Kent" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...



[text deleted]

Art Unwin
unwinantennas.com/

I went to your website but I didn't see any specific antenna
information,
like a ham might want to build a new type of antenna, to try it out.

[text deleted

A helix is an excellent example to talk about to arrive at small full
wave antennas.
When you follow the reasoning of the extension to Gaussian law of
statics which makes
it dynamic it brings to the surface that a radiator can be any size or
shape as long as it is in equilibrium.

[ text deleted]

By the way my antennas are always of a full wavelength which by virtue
of its reduced volume then becomes a small FULL wave antennas to
retain the inherrent efficiencies of full wave antennas in equilibrium
as well as resonant.
Allow me to continu on this line of thinking. It should now be seen
that an array is also shrunken not only by the shortened elements but
also by the fact that element spacings conform to the equilibrium of
the array as a whole! We then have an array that does not have to have
elements at certain distance from each other ad infirnitum but just
two elements much closer together where all radiation is accounted
for!
Hope the above helps you out.

[text deleted]

Cheers and beers
Art Unwin KB9MZ

Well, I'm good with the cheers and beers, but no way am I close
to clipping and snipping (wire) to make an Unwin Antenna.

What do they look like? Photos? Diagrams? Crayola drawings?

Don't get me wrong, OM, theory is important but there's no textbook
that loads up at 7220 KHz. Show me some metal parts.

I am sharing information with all so there is nothing to stop you
making one for your own use.
I really want the Britts to use it on their small gardens at the back
and get on the top bands.
They are still into experimenting oiver there where America still is
in the throw away society
preferring the Lazy Boy and a six pack instead of a hobby. All they
want to be is LOUD and talk over the other cb ers
which is why their interest in antennas evolve solely around gain and
a amplifier.
Read some of the postings and eventually you will find where it tells
you how to make one as I am not giving them away
for trial runs on the air. Just follow what is evident, a radiator can
be any shape size or elevation as long as it is in equilibrium.
Put another way if during construction you add lumped loads in any
form then they must be cancelled. Now let your imagination run wild.
I have made one in sheet form so there are plenty of options

Part three of many
 

On Jul 9, 8:10 pm, "Clark Kent" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

... On Jul 9, 12:55 am, "Clark Kent" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...



[text deleted]

Art Unwin
unwinantennas.com/

I went to your website but I didn't see any specific antenna
information,
like a ham might want to build a new type of antenna, to try it out.

[text deleted

A helix is an excellent example to talk about to arrive at small full
wave antennas.
When you follow the reasoning of the extension to Gaussian law of
statics which makes
it dynamic it brings to the surface that a radiator can be any size or
shape as long as it is in equilibrium.

[ text deleted]

By the way my antennas are always of a full wavelength which by virtue
of its reduced volume then becomes a small FULL wave antennas to
retain the inherrent efficiencies of full wave antennas in equilibrium
as well as resonant.
Allow me to continu on this line of thinking. It should now be seen
that an array is also shrunken not only by the shortened elements but
also by the fact that element spacings conform to the equilibrium of
the array as a whole! We then have an array that does not have to have
elements at certain distance from each other ad infirnitum but just
two elements much closer together where all radiation is accounted
for!
Hope the above helps you out.

[text deleted]

Cheers and beers
Art Unwin KB9MZ

Well, I'm good with the cheers and beers, but no way am I close
to clipping and snipping (wire) to make an Unwin Antenna.

What do they look like? Photos? Diagrams? Crayola drawings?

Don't get me wrong, OM, theory is important but there's no textbook
that loads up at 7220 KHz. Show me some metal parts.

Tell you what, get some wire twice the WL of the frequency you are
interested in.
Wind a close coil any diameter with it until half the wire is used
then change direction and come back
without changing wire winding direction and wind the wire on top of
the first coil where you finish with two wires to feed.
Put a variometer in series with it and then get on the air. Now this
is not exactly in equilibrium because one coil is a larger diameter
than
the other. Nor is the wire pre twisted pair which nullifies near field
noise to my thinking. Now you have a helix style antenna but without
the helix.
Coat the antenna with an alkyd type solution before you slide it off
the tube since the inside coil must be exposed the same way the
outside coil is exposed
'So it is easy to build a common standard form as stated on my page. I
really do not know what the beef is. Alternatively make a zig zag with
your wire two times and connect the wires at the top so you have two
laminations,. Be inventive and don't throw your other antenna away.
Hams in the past have tested their new antennas only to get insulted
over the manner of testing so a ham should never make claims regarding
gain

Part three of many
 

A helix wound antenna with a double winding? Really?
- 'Doc

Part three of many
 

wrote in message
...
A helix wound antenna with a double winding? Really?
- 'Doc

Double winding - in which direction and spaced how far apart in each
direction?

Part three of many
 

W3CQH wrote:
wrote in message
...
A helix wound antenna with a double winding? Really?
- 'Doc

Double winding - in which direction and spaced how far apart in each
direction?



This URL, of a patent of an antenna which is growing in commercial use,
describes just such a winding and how it is constructed for real world
use. I am almost positive this is the "double helix winding method"
which Art is making reference to:

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7187335/fulltext.html

In particular, this reference in the patent:

"It has been found that interlacing a false winding into a current
enhancing unit (such as the top unit winding shown in FIG. 6) or a
radiation resistance unit (such as a helix as shown in FIG. 7) enhances
the bandwidth of the top unit as well as improves the current profile
along the antenna. The interlaced false winding has little effect on the
resonant frequency of the antenna system."

Regards,
JS

Part three of many
 

On Jul 10, 11:17 am, John Smith wrote:
W3CQH wrote:
wrote in message
...
A helix wound antenna with a double winding? Really?
- 'Doc

Double winding - in which direction and spaced how far apart in each
direction?

This URL, of a patent of an antenna which is growing in commercial use,
describes just such a winding and how it is constructed for real world
use. I am almost positive this is the "double helix winding method"
which Art is making reference to:

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7187335/fulltext.html

In particular, this reference in the patent:

"It has been found that interlacing a false winding into a current
enhancing unit (such as the top unit winding shown in FIG. 6) or a
radiation resistance unit (such as a helix as shown in FIG. 7) enhances
the bandwidth of the top unit as well as improves the current profile
along the antenna. The interlaced false winding has little effect on the
resonant frequency of the antenna system."

Regards,
JS

What you are refering to i believe is the Rhode Island antenna that
has been attacked
by all of ham radio but again it could be another follow up new
antenna tho it seems a bit soon
since they had to resubmit the first patent to get it accepted.
John, imagine the following
1 a rcp and a lcp helix driven in parallel with counterpoise. What
would the ensueing gain consist of?
2 a rcp and a lcp helix driven antenna connected at the top and fed
with out a counterpoise ( assumption is that windings do not come in
contact with each other)
What would the ensuing gain, if any, consist of ?
Would either 1 or 2 produce a negative total gain?
I am really having a difficult time understanding why hams THINK so
bad of this type of antenna, with close windings or in pitched form
You just can't stop wire radiating so where are they coming from?
Regards
Art

Regards Art
Nobody has supplied any reasoning of what radiation a ham could expect
from such an arrangement. Yet anybody can check it out forthemselves
without unsubstantiated off the cuff comments meant to inflict pain

Part three of many
 

Art Unwin wrote:

...
What you are refering to i believe is the Rhode Island antenna that
has been attacked
....
Art

Regards Art
Nobody has supplied any reasoning of what radiation a ham could expect
from such an arrangement. Yet anybody can check it out forthemselves
without unsubstantiated off the cuff comments meant to inflict pain

It is the "Distributed Load Monopole" (DLM) antenna by Robert Vincent ...

I have a 50 ft. one in my front yard and disquised as a flagpole, for 80m.

At the back of the house, and hidden from view, is a 1/2 version for 10m.

For me, it is a perfect design ... I have not incorporated the
"interlaced winding(s)", yet ...

Regards,
JS

Part three of many
 

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Tell you what, get some wire twice the WL of the frequency you are
interested in.
Wind a close coil any diameter with it until half the wire is used
then change direction and come back
without changing wire winding direction and wind the wire on top of
the first coil where you finish with two wires to feed.
Put a variometer in series with it and then get on the air. Now this
is not exactly in equilibrium because one coil is a larger diameter
than
the other. Nor is the wire pre twisted pair which nullifies near field
noise to my thinking. Now you have a helix style antenna but without
the helix.
Coat the antenna with an alkyd type solution before you slide it off
the tube since the inside coil must be exposed the same way the
outside coil is exposed


OK, I can do most of that. However, I went to your page for some variometer
details, as I don't have one. No luck. From other reading it appears to be
a loosely couple balun or un-un. But near there on your page, I discovered
some verbiage about building an antenna and saw the reference to a 12-inch
diameter. Good find, as I was going to go smaller.

If I wound the thing on cardboard (like a big empty ice cream tub from the
ice cream store), could I avoid having to take the coil(s) off the form?
What about a paint bucket or an empty pool chlorine tub? I'd sorta like to
skip that alkyd step. Messy.

Need more variometer data, but I'll dig for that

Part three of many
 

"Clark Kent" wrote in message
...

( Big snip)

Need more variometer data, but I'll dig for that


Variometer design he

http://www.qsl.net/in3otd/variodes.html

Cheers,
John

Part three of many
 

"Clark Kent" wrote in message
...

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Tell you what, get some wire twice the WL of the frequency you are
interested in.
Wind a close coil any diameter with it until half the wire is used
then change direction and come back
without changing wire winding direction and wind the wire on top of
the first coil where you finish with two wires to feed.
Put a variometer in series with it and then get on the air. Now this
is not exactly in equilibrium because one coil is a larger diameter
than
the other. Nor is the wire pre twisted pair which nullifies near field
noise to my thinking. Now you have a helix style antenna but without
the helix.
Coat the antenna with an alkyd type solution before you slide it off
the tube since the inside coil must be exposed the same way the
outside coil is exposed


OK, I can do most of that. However, I went to your page for some
variometer
details, as I don't have one. No luck. From other reading it appears to
be
a loosely couple balun or un-un. But near there on your page, I
discovered
some verbiage about building an antenna and saw the reference to a 12-inch
diameter. Good find, as I was going to go smaller.

If I wound the thing on cardboard (like a big empty ice cream tub from the
ice cream store), could I avoid having to take the coil(s) off the form?
What about a paint bucket or an empty pool chlorine tub? I'd sorta like
to
skip that alkyd step. Messy.

Need more variometer data, but I'll dig for that

I thought I might try and experiment with building one, since it seems
simple. The variometer is a deal killer however. Is there any reason a
transmatch/balun couldn't be used?

Part three of many
 

On Jul 11, 2:32 pm, "Wayne" wrote:
"Clark Kent" wrote in message

...



"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Tell you what, get some wire twice the WL of the frequency you are
interested in.
Wind a close coil any diameter with it until half the wire is used
then change direction and come back
without changing wire winding direction and wind the wire on top of
the first coil where you finish with two wires to feed.
Put a variometer in series with it and then get on the air. Now this
is not exactly in equilibrium because one coil is a larger diameter
than
the other. Nor is the wire pre twisted pair which nullifies near field
noise to my thinking. Now you have a helix style antenna but without
the helix.
Coat the antenna with an alkyd type solution before you slide it off
the tube since the inside coil must be exposed the same way the
outside coil is exposed

OK, I can do most of that. However, I went to your page for some
variometer
details, as I don't have one. No luck. From other reading it appears to
be
a loosely couple balun or un-un. But near there on your page, I
discovered
some verbiage about building an antenna and saw the reference to a 12-inch
diameter. Good find, as I was going to go smaller.

If I wound the thing on cardboard (like a big empty ice cream tub from the
ice cream store), could I avoid having to take the coil(s) off the form?
What about a paint bucket or an empty pool chlorine tub? I'd sorta like
to
skip that alkyd step. Messy.

Need more variometer data, but I'll dig for that

I thought I might try and experiment with building one, since it seems
simple. The variometer is a deal killer however. Is there any reason a
transmatch/balun couldn't be used?

The variometer allows the frequency to be moved as a multiple of a
wavelength.
Thus allows your antenna to vary as you turn the knob on the radio.
If you do not use a variometer then you just have to hope that one of
the many suitable swr points rest
upon your frequency of choice. This can also be simulated by a series
of jumpers or a slider method
over the surface of the windings. For me I prefer a variometer since
the motor drive can be that which is dismantled from the radio's tuner
such that you have an automatic set up the same as the new variable
antenna that hit the market a few years ago except this design
is less than $100.....big difference.......and much much
smaller....... and yes the variometer is placed on the top of the
tower with your 160M
rotatable antenna. Don't know where I will go next! Sweaty...need a
shower
Unwinantennas.com/

Part three of many
 

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Jul 11, 2:32 pm, "Wayne" wrote:
"Clark Kent" wrote in message

...



"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

Tell you what, get some wire twice the WL of the frequency you are
interested in.
Wind a close coil any diameter with it until half the wire is used
then change direction and come back
without changing wire winding direction and wind the wire on top of
the first coil where you finish with two wires to feed.
Put a variometer in series with it and then get on the air. Now this
is not exactly in equilibrium because one coil is a larger diameter
than
the other. Nor is the wire pre twisted pair which nullifies near
field
noise to my thinking. Now you have a helix style antenna but without
the helix.
Coat the antenna with an alkyd type solution before you slide it off
the tube since the inside coil must be exposed the same way the
outside coil is exposed

OK, I can do most of that. However, I went to your page for some
variometer
details, as I don't have one. No luck. From other reading it appears
to
be
a loosely couple balun or un-un. But near there on your page, I
discovered
some verbiage about building an antenna and saw the reference to a
12-inch
diameter. Good find, as I was going to go smaller.

If I wound the thing on cardboard (like a big empty ice cream tub from
the
ice cream store), could I avoid having to take the coil(s) off the
form?
What about a paint bucket or an empty pool chlorine tub? I'd sorta
like
to
skip that alkyd step. Messy.

Need more variometer data, but I'll dig for that

I thought I might try and experiment with building one, since it seems
simple. The variometer is a deal killer however. Is there any reason a
transmatch/balun couldn't be used?

The variometer allows the frequency to be moved as a multiple of a
wavelength.
Thus allows your antenna to vary as you turn the knob on the radio.
If you do not use a variometer then you just have to hope that one of
the many suitable swr points rest
upon your frequency of choice. This can also be simulated by a series
of jumpers or a slider method
over the surface of the windings. For me I prefer a variometer since
the motor drive can be that which is dismantled from the radio's tuner
such that you have an automatic set up the same as the new variable
antenna that hit the market a few years ago except this design
is less than $100.....big difference.......and much much
smaller....... and yes the variometer is placed on the top of the
tower with your 160M
rotatable antenna. Don't know where I will go next! Sweaty...need a
shower
Unwinantennas.com/

Suddenly, here's just a TON of stuff that needs some good sense sprinkled on
it. Just a few highlights:

I just took another look at the website and further examined the graphs at
the bottom. Per your instructions, using approximately 2000 ft of wire
means the antenna is wound for a wl of 1000 ft, 305 meters or around 1 MHz.
How is it you're getting a decent SWR nearly everywhere from 1.0 to 100 MHz?
Look, the WORST number for SWR is about 4:1, well within the range of any
decent tuner. BTW, it looks like the response of a comb filter, except
that the cancellation frequencies between the reinforcements don't look as
lossy as they should look.

The variometer will do variable transformer coupling. OK fine, but I think
you should have provided a description for one. The link to
http://www.qsl.net/in3otd/variodes.html was instructive but ... I have no
idea what coil inductances to shoot for. Groping in the dark is not fun.

What does it mean to move the frequency as a multiple of wavelength?

What does it mean for the antenna to vary as I turn the knob on the radio?
I've got decades of experience with this hobby and that does not compute.
You shouldn't throw this stuff out and figure we're mind readers.

160m rotatable antenna? I don't travel in those circles. If that was a
joke, I guess I need my sense of humor recalibrated.

Here's my own "tell you what": I'll wind one of these things for 20m, which
isn't a lot of wire. I have an antenna analyzer that will tell me a few
nice things about what I have.

Then if the SWR is anything like reasonable, it's Kenwood Time! I'll check
for who I can hear and try working him. ... and I'll check for WWV on 15.
I can usually hear him any day, often on a cheap portable radio with a whip
antenna.

Using a local ham (eliminating the bulk of QSB) I can compare antennas for
equal S-meter readings with a switchable attenuator in line with the better
antenna.

That will settle it for me.