"David G. Nagel" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Richard Harrison wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
"Could you give a similar description only this time make it a 5/8
wavelength antenna."
...
Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard:

I certainly don't want to engage in a large argument.

Rather, I would just venture an opinion directly related to my real world
construction experiences, and the results from the same:

If there are notable gains from constructing a 5/8 wave antenna, as
opposed to a 1/2 wave--I have NOT seen them.

It all looks good in EZNEC and/or mmana-gal (or, "on paper"), however, in
real world s-meter/signal-reports, "it" does not.

Perhaps I have experienced a anomaly(s?)

Or, put simply, the extra "hassle" in dealing with these extended lengths
is simply "not worth it!"

Regards,
JS

I think that we all should remember that it is the "ART" of antenna design
not the "SCIENCE" of antenna design.

Dave WD9BDZ

its only an art to art its a science to everyone else. art paints his
antennas with magical mystery jumping diamagnetic neutrinos that levitate in
the breeze. sounds like paintings like the melted watch and distorted
perceptions to me.

On Nov 16, 11:58*am, "Dave" wrote:
"David G. Nagel" wrote in om...



John Smith wrote:
Richard Harrison wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
"Could you give a similar description only this time make it a 5/8
wavelength antenna."
...
Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard:

I certainly don't want to engage in a large argument.

Rather, I would just venture an opinion directly related to my real world
construction experiences, and the results from the same:

If there are notable gains from constructing a 5/8 wave antenna, as
opposed to a 1/2 wave--I have NOT seen them.

It all looks good in EZNEC and/or mmana-gal (or, "on paper"), however, in
real world s-meter/signal-reports, "it" does not.

Perhaps I have experienced a anomaly(s?)

Or, put simply, the extra "hassle" in dealing with these extended lengths
is simply "not worth it!"

Regards,
JS

I think that we all should remember that it is the "ART" of antenna design
not the "SCIENCE" of antenna design.

Dave WD9BDZ

its only an art to art its a science to everyone else. *art paints his
antennas with magical mystery jumping diamagnetic neutrinos that levitate in
the breeze. *sounds like paintings like the melted watch and distorted
perceptions to me.

No David, I am trying to lead people away from the idea of break away
elements from the radiator
substance itself. We all recognise that the rotation of the Sun has a
pivitable place in radiation.
It is also estimated that there are billions of particles per cubic
meter here on Earth which came from the Sun.
So what is so wrong in looking for a connection between these
particles and radiatiation? After all we are aware that they will come
to rest on a material that will not apply a bond to these particles
such as a diagmatic material which radiators are made of?
We also know that these particles in flight must have a straight line
projection that exceeds the gravitational pull and possibly this is
the weak force which is acknoweledged in the science community! Yet we
hang on to the idea that current cannot flow in the center of a
fractional wavelkength radiator
purely on similar speculation since it has never been observed or
proven. It just isn't a lot of sense and the ARRL could not care less
relying on a cycle of informing new hams how to solder a connector on
coax.
Good grief
Regards
Art

Dave wrote:
"High power coaxial transmission lines have hollow center conductors."

Yes, and the metal which could have filled the hollow space would add no
conductivity at HF.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:
Dave wrote:
"High power coaxial transmission lines have hollow center conductors."

Yes, and the metal which could have filled the hollow space would add no
conductivity at HF.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI


Power handling and efficiency increase as the frequency decreases; a
solid center conductor doesn't help at LF either.

http://www.myat.com/index.html

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 21:44:07 +0000, Dave wrote:

Richard Harrison wrote:
Dave wrote:
"High power coaxial transmission lines have hollow center conductors."

Yes, and the metal which could have filled the hollow space would add no
conductivity at HF.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI


Power handling and efficiency increase as the frequency decreases; a
solid center conductor doesn't help at LF either.

http://www.myat.com/index.html


As a matter of fact skin depth tends to keep power conductors (50/60
Hz) below 1 inch (25 mm) diameter. It becomes easier and cheaper to
"quad them up" (four conductors a couple of hand spans apart).

Richard Harrison wrote:
Dave wrote:
"High power coaxial transmission lines have hollow center conductors."

Yes, and the metal which could have filled the hollow space would add no
conductivity at HF.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI


Ever seen the coax used on TV transmission lines? In rough numbers is is
a pipe about 6" in diameter with another pipe about 1" in diameter held
centered inside the larger one by spacers.

"David G. Nagel" wrote in message
...
Richard Harrison wrote:
Dave wrote:
"High power coaxial transmission lines have hollow center conductors."

Yes, and the metal which could have filled the hollow space would add no
conductivity at HF.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI


Ever seen the coax used on TV transmission lines? In rough numbers is is
a pipe about 6" in diameter with another pipe about 1" in diameter held
centered inside the larger one by spacers.

Yup. Also applies to rigid coax used for 400 MHz Naval radars.

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Nov 16, 11:58 am, "Dave" wrote:
After all we are aware that they will come
to rest on a material that will not apply a bond to these particles
such as a diagmatic material which radiators are made of?

you still haven't explained how my ferromagnetic radiators work.

Dave wrote:
"David G. Nagel" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Richard Harrison wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
"Could you give a similar description only this time make it a 5/8
wavelength antenna."
...
Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI
Richard:

I certainly don't want to engage in a large argument.

Rather, I would just venture an opinion directly related to my real world
construction experiences, and the results from the same:

If there are notable gains from constructing a 5/8 wave antenna, as
opposed to a 1/2 wave--I have NOT seen them.

It all looks good in EZNEC and/or mmana-gal (or, "on paper"), however, in
real world s-meter/signal-reports, "it" does not.

Perhaps I have experienced a anomaly(s?)

Or, put simply, the extra "hassle" in dealing with these extended lengths
is simply "not worth it!"

Regards,
JS
I think that we all should remember that it is the "ART" of antenna design
not the "SCIENCE" of antenna design.

Dave WD9BDZ

its only an art to art its a science to everyone else. art paints his
antennas with magical mystery jumping diamagnetic neutrinos that levitate in
the breeze. sounds like paintings like the melted watch and distorted
perceptions to me.


The last time that I built an antenna I used the formula to get the
appropriate length then I had to adjust it to obtain the optimal
readings for the frequency I was using.

David G. Nagel wrote:

The last time that I built an antenna I used the formula to get the
appropriate length then I had to adjust it to obtain the optimal
readings for the frequency I was using.

Did "the formula" take into account any insulation, conductor resistivity,
conductor diameter, height above ground, characteristics of the ground,
and objects in the near field including supports?

If not, what is your point?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.