Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() What diametric ratio must a fractional wave length radiator be to allow contrary current flow thru it's center. ? Diameter / wavelength = 1.0, 0.5, 0.1. 0.001, 0.0001, 0.00001,...? Regards Art |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Art Unwin" wrote in message ... What diametric ratio must a fractional wave length radiator be to allow contrary current flow thru it's center. ? Diameter / wavelength = 1.0, 0.5, 0.1. 0.001, 0.0001, 0.00001,...? Regards Art infinite |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 13, 2:44*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message ... What diametric ratio must a fractional wave length radiator be to allow contrary current flow thru it's center. ? Diameter / wavelength = 1.0, * *0.5, *0.1. * * 0.001, * * *0.0001, 0.00001,...? Regards Art infinite David Just for the record, skin depth is proportional to frequency Thus for very hight frequency the skin depth is exceedingly small This tells us that the effect of eddy current with respect to the diameter is NOT infinite but limit dependent on the applied frequency. I am not extending this thread, but on rereading it is obvious to me that there is a boundary within which a current could possibly travel. But since the current is zero at the end I am more inclined to think that applied current is balanced at the source so that zero current is inevitable at the end of the radiator, How this is done appears to be something like a pump action which with laminar flow creates cavitation resistances in line with Bernoulis theorems.IE velocity changes that are dependent on distributed load losses of the radiator The end of this thread ! Art Art |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Art wrote:
"David just for the record, skin depth is proportional to frequency----." Not exactly. Skin depth is inversely proportional to the square root of the frequency. For example at 1 Hz the skin depth is about 2.6 in. in copper. At 10 Hz. it is about 0.826 in. and at 100 Hz the depth is about 0.260 in. and at 1000 Hz the depth is 0.0826 in. etc. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Richard Harrison" wrote in message ... Art wrote: "David just for the record, skin depth is proportional to frequency----." Not exactly. Skin depth is inversely proportional to the square root of the frequency. For example at 1 Hz the skin depth is about 2.6 in. in copper. At 10 Hz. it is about 0.826 in. and at 100 Hz the depth is about 0.260 in. and at 1000 Hz the depth is 0.0826 in. etc. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI don't confuse him with the facts! |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 23, 5:05*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Richard Harrison" wrote in message ... Art wrote: "David just for the record, skin depth is proportional to frequency----." Not exactly. Skin depth is inversely proportional to the square root of the frequency. For example at 1 Hz the skin depth is about 2.6 in. in copper. At 10 Hz.. it is about 0.826 in. and at 100 Hz the depth is about 0.260 in. and at 1000 Hz the depth is 0.0826 in. etc. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI don't confuse him with the facts! My facts were correct as stated. Richard stated the "exact" proportions which is really nit picking. Physics books say it is "proportional" which states that it is frequency change what affects skin depth. It is stated exactly that way in the book that Richard has just obtained and quoted Art |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard Harrison wrote:
Art wrote: "David just for the record, skin depth is proportional to frequency----." Not exactly. Skin depth is inversely proportional to the square root of the frequency. For example at 1 Hz the skin depth is about 2.6 in. in copper. At 10 Hz. it is about 0.826 in. and at 100 Hz the depth is about 0.260 in. and at 1000 Hz the depth is 0.0826 in. etc. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Actually, skin depth is inversely proportional to the square root of frequency only in a good conductor like copper. Some common materials like dirt are fairly good conductors at low frequencies but behave more like dielectrics at higher frequencies. And skin depth doesn't change with frequency in a dielectric. For "average" ground (0.005 S/m conductivity, permittivity of 13), the transition between conductor behavior and dielectric behavior is at about 6.9 MHz, in the middle of the HF range. Well below that frequency, the skin depth changes in inverse proportion to the square root of the frequency; above it, the skin depth stays nearly constant. For "average" ground: Freq MHz Skin Depth m 0.01 71.2 0.5 10.4 1 7.6 2 5.8 4 4.7 6.9 4.2 8 4.1 16 3.9 100 3.8 Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 23, 4:43*pm, (Richard Harrison)
wrote: Art wrote: "David just for the record, skin depth is proportional to frequency----." Not exactly. Skin depth is inversely proportional to the square root of the frequency. For example at 1 Hz the skin depth is about 2.6 in. in copper. At 10 Hz. it is about 0.826 in. and at 100 Hz the depth is about 0.260 in. and at 1000 Hz the depth is 0.0826 in. etc. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Yes, I should have used "varied" instead of "proportional" But the essence of the posting is still correct namely, it is false to state that the skin effect always penetrate thro out the conductor as is the statement that a current cannot travel thru the center of a conductor where the material is devoid of eddy currents but enclosedn by a eddy current shield This is not to say that with a applied AC current such a route is chosen as I previously thought Art |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Art Unwin" wrote in message ... On Jan 23, 4:43 pm, (Richard Harrison) wrote: For example at 1 Hz the skin depth is about 2.6 in. in copper. At 10 Hz. it is about 0.826 in. and at 100 Hz the depth is about 0.260 in. and at 1000 Hz the depth is 0.0826 in. etc. Yes, I should have used "varied" instead of "proportional" But the essence of the posting is still correct namely, it is false to state that the skin effect always penetrate thro out the conductor as is the statement that a current cannot travel thru the center of a conductor where the material is devoid of eddy currents but enclosedn by a eddy current shield of course current travels through the center of the conductor, just not the way you had thought. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 13, 2:44*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message ... What diametric ratio must a fractional wave length radiator be to allow contrary current flow thru it's center. ? Diameter / wavelength = 1.0, * *0.5, *0.1. * * 0.001, * * *0.0001, 0.00001,...? Regards Art infinite Is that your final answer or is your last posting the final answer ? The clock starts NOW |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Tilted radiator | Antenna | |||
Circuitry of a radiator | Antenna | |||
internal antenna current flow | Antenna | |||
Mechanics of AC current flow - ? | Antenna | |||
KB9RQZ: WHY DO YOU PERPETUATE LIES AND DISHONESTY IN THE FACE OF GOOGLE ARCHIVES TO THE CONTRARY? | Policy |