On Sep 12, 7:04*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On Sep 12, 5:20 pm, "Dave" wrote:

If you have an optimizer program I will identify it for you.

i have YO and AO but have played with EZNEC and some others... pick your
program and tell me where to put in the weak force term.

Where do I pick up the money:

the emmy's don't have money, just funny statues or some such junk... you
aren't worth the cash, just a good laugh.

Excellent
pull up AO optimiser
Above ground
800 Mhz;inches

Put in xyz for centerfed wasvelength for 800 Mhz
Put in different numbers for xyz for one wire
Source is at the centre

a=1
aa=any number say 8
b =2
bb=any number say 10
c=3
cc=any number say 12
dia = 0.1 inches

vary aa bb and cc only this gives the program free reign to produce a
vertical or a tipped antenna without being
guided one way or the other.ie all numbers are different change entry
numbers if you like as long as there are no repeats
and let the optimizer run where it wants to for resistive impedance ,
max gain or both.
a,b,c are low numbers so the radiator does not drift in terms of
height

20 segments per half wave length should be enough. Impedance will come
out close to 200 ohms as a guess
AND MAXIMUM GAIN OR JUST GAIN OR JUST RESISTIVE IMPEDANCE....YOUR
CHOICE.
LET EVERYBODY KNOW WHAT YOU GET
Now you are on the hot plate at last.
Put up or shut up

Regards
Art KB9MZ......xg

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Sep 12, 7:04 pm, "Dave" wrote:
Now you are on the hot plate at last.
Put up or shut up

not even worth opening the program. for I know that any time you let the
optimizer run without realistic bounds and go for maximum gain you are going
to get either and unrealizable design or something that no one would want to
use anyway. that is what has been fooling you all along, you don't know the
limitations of the programs you are using and taking their results as
gospel.