On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:41:15 -0700, Richard Clark wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:05:56 -0400, "W3CQH"
wrote:

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

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 19:11:52 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

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


Take one wavelength of zip cord. Wrap it around any diameter form, as
distinctly specified above by the authur. Half the wire is used going,
and half the wire is used returning by specification of the zip cord, as
distinctly specified above by the authur.

There is no change in winding direction as zip cord guarantees this by
physical attachment, as specified above by the authur. Both wires are
wrapped without changing direction, as distinctly specified above by the
author.

Not that I have any confidence in Art's antenna design. But you wind a
cylinder with zip cord from left to right, with the left end pair being
the feed and the right pair shorted (as if a single 2W wire) then the
'return winding' will essentially be wrapped in the opposite direction.

"Tehrasha Darkon" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:41:15 -0700, Richard Clark wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:05:56 -0400, "W3CQH"
wrote:

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

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 19:11:52 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

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


Take one wavelength of zip cord. Wrap it around any diameter form, as
distinctly specified above by the authur. Half the wire is used going,
and half the wire is used returning by specification of the zip cord, as
distinctly specified above by the authur.

There is no change in winding direction as zip cord guarantees this by
physical attachment, as specified above by the authur. Both wires are
wrapped without changing direction, as distinctly specified above by the
author.

Not that I have any confidence in Art's antenna design. But you wind a
cylinder with zip cord from left to right, with the left end pair being
the feed and the right pair shorted (as if a single 2W wire) then the
'return winding' will essentially be wrapped in the opposite direction.

Well if you do wrap in one direction and then immediately wrap in the
opposite direction upon each other, I wonder what the cancellation db
figures are. On the other hand if you should wrap in the reverse direction
with some substantial spacing, I could imagine that there might be some gain
although very small??

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:22:43 -0400, "W3CQH"
wrote:

I could imagine that there might be some gain
although very small??

-60dB gain is quite substantial - even if small. All antennas have
gain.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Tehrasha Darkon" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:41:15 -0700, Richard Clark wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:05:56 -0400, "W3CQH"
wrote:

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

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 19:11:52 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

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


Take one wavelength of zip cord. Wrap it around any diameter form, as
distinctly specified above by the authur. Half the wire is used going,
and half the wire is used returning by specification of the zip cord, as
distinctly specified above by the authur.

There is no change in winding direction as zip cord guarantees this by
physical attachment, as specified above by the authur. Both wires are
wrapped without changing direction, as distinctly specified above by the
author.

Not that I have any confidence in Art's antenna design. But you wind a
cylinder with zip cord from left to right, with the left end pair being
the feed and the right pair shorted (as if a single 2W wire) then the
'return winding' will essentially be wrapped in the opposite direction.

BTW if you split the 2 zip cord wires apart you could construct a loop
antenna, in just about any configuration you wished.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:25:30 -0400, "W3CQH"
wrote:

BTW if you split the 2 zip cord wires apart you could construct a loop
antenna, in just about any configuration you wished.

We aren't talking about "any" antenna, just those with superior weak
force performance due to neutron emission. It's all there on the
page, just read it!

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 16:06:27 +0000 (UTC), Tehrasha Darkon
wrote:

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 19:11:52 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

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

then the
'return winding' will essentially be wrapped in the opposite direction.

The authur is quite distinct. Zip cord perfectly enforces the
original specification of winding direction. Any confusion that
results is not expressed by the explicit statement from that authur
above.

Further, results of supremely weak performance confirms this and has
been experienced by many (including Guss himself) for more than 3
centuries now.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Jul 10, 11:06 am, Tehrasha Darkon wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:41:15 -0700, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:05:56 -0400, "W3CQH"
wrote:

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

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 19:11:52 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

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

Take one wavelength of zip cord. Wrap it around any diameter form, as
distinctly specified above by the authur. Half the wire is used going,
and half the wire is used returning by specification of the zip cord, as
distinctly specified above by the authur.

There is no change in winding direction as zip cord guarantees this by
physical attachment, as specified above by the authur. Both wires are
wrapped without changing direction, as distinctly specified above by the
author.

Not that I have any confidence in Art's antenna design. But you wind a
cylinder with zip cord from left to right, with the left end pair being
the feed and the right pair shorted (as if a single 2W wire) then the
'return winding' will essentially be wrapped in the opposite direction.

Correct. And if zip wire is used then you are adding a lumped load
which is a violation with respect to equilibriu,

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:21:56 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

Not that I have any confidence in Art's antenna design. But you wind a
cylinder with zip cord from left to right, with the left end pair being
the feed and the right pair shorted (as if a single 2W wire) then the
'return winding' will essentially be wrapped in the opposite direction.

Correct. And if zip wire is used then you are adding a lumped load
which is a violation with respect to equilibriu,

The zip cord is in true equilibrium for any winding. What you
describe is twisting and this violates equilibrium. That won't work,
and Guss has demonstrated this three centuries ago.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:21:56 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

Not that I have any confidence in Art's antenna design. But you wind a
cylinder with zip cord from left to right, with the left end pair being
the feed and the right pair shorted (as if a single 2W wire) then the
'return winding' will essentially be wrapped in the opposite direction.
Correct. And if zip wire is used then you are adding a lumped load
which is a violation with respect to equilibriu,

The zip cord is in true equilibrium for any winding. What you
describe is twisting and this violates equilibrium. That won't work,
and Guss has demonstrated this three centuries ago.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Now wait just a minute, Richard. I think it may depend on the zip cord
you use. Some of the zip cord, when close wound, will have more
dielectric between the interturn wires than between the 2 wires of the
zip cord itself. Of course it _can_ be rebalanced if the air gap
impressed into the plastic during manufacturing is the correct depth.

tom
K0TAR