Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tom, W8ji apparently is an expert with antennas having lectured
at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, apparently a break off from the standard ham statements of bigger is better as well as more wire is better. I have searched and searched for the reason why such a statement is spread around as if it is has a factual or a mathematical statement to back it up. For instance a quad radiator is not straight! Nor is a loop or nor a helical as well as many others. At the same time it is recognized that all is not understood about radiation and never has a radiator been constructed that complies in its entirety with Maxwell. I have untold books on antennas but none (not including ARRL stuff) provide any sort of reason that this could be true. Is anybody aware of a recognized author stating why this should be considered true when current leaning is towards point radiation which obviously seen as a break away statement.. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Art Unwin wrote:
Tom, W8ji apparently is an expert with antennas having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, I highly doubt he ever said anything of the sort. apparently a break off from the standard ham statements of bigger is better as well as more wire is better. And the physical reality that antenna performance is directly related to size in wavelengths. snip rest -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Art Unwin wrote:
Tom, W8ji apparently is an expert with antennas having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, Hmm. Please provide a reference where this was stated. I doubt that's what was actually the verbiage used. cognized that all is not understood about radiation and never has a radiator been constructed that complies in its entirety with Maxwell. According to only you. I have untold books on antennas but none (not including ARRL stuff) provide any sort of reason that this could be true. Is anybody aware of a recognized author stating why this should be considered true when current leaning is towards point radiation which obviously seen as a break away statement.. Again, please provide a reference that "current leaning is towards point radiation". I sure I won't get a real answer here. As usual. Just like his bailout on providing a description on his antenna earlier this weekend. fraud. tom K0TAR |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 30, 5:15*pm, wrote:
Art Unwin wrote: Tom, W8ji *apparently is an expert with antennas *having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, I highly doubt he ever said anything of the sort. As long as you turn a blind eye to what he states then you are in good shape! But then somebody in this group will point you to Tom's statement and you can then respond as to what he really meant which is not what he stated. apparently a break off from the standard ham statements of bigger is better as well as more wire is better. And the physical reality that antenna performance is directly related to size in wavelengths. It depends on your definition of "size". I prefer the term encapsulating volume. All physics laws are based on the presence of equilibrium. Thus you may deform a radiator to the smallest volume as long as you retain a state of equilibrium, regardless of the number of wavelengths at issue. This is why "point radiation" is still discussed. As an aside, the number of wavelengths used has nothing to do with Maxwells equations which accounts for ALL forces presence in the forming of radiation and not the simple radiator coupling and re radiation approach alone. It all comes down to root L.C. in a equilibrium environment as the determinate factor in his equations. So, the bottom line is that you disagree with the statement made by Tom as being incorrect. It will be interesting what the rest of the group have to say as they wade in. snip rest -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 30, 6:29*pm, tom wrote:
Art Unwin wrote: Tom, W8ji *apparently is an expert with antennas *having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, Hmm. *Please provide a reference where this was stated. *I doubt that's what was actually the verbiage used. cognized that all is not understood about radiation and never *has a radiator been constructed that complies in its entirety with Maxwell. According to only you. I have untold books on antennas but none (not including ARRL stuff) provide any sort of reason that this could be true. Is anybody aware of a recognized author stating why this should be considered true when current leaning is towards point radiation which obviously seen as a break away statement.. Again, please provide a reference that "current leaning is towards point radiation". I sure I won't get a real answer here. *As usual. Just like his bailout on providing a description on his antenna earlier this weekend. fraud. tom K0TAR You are correct Tom. I have no interest in exchanging insults with you. My interests are in radio to which you supply nothing. There you go, I have now answered you once and that is it. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:54:05 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote: Tom, W8ji apparently is an expert with antennas having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, He might have been talking about small antennas: http://www.w8ji.com/radiation_resistance.htm "Small antennas require extraordinary care to obtain high efficiency." The 2004 Dayton PowerPoint presentation is at: http://www.w8ji.com/Dayton/Limited%20Space%20Antennas.ppt Using Google, I couldn't find any statement resembling the "straight radiators" claim. Ummm... fractal antennas are anything but straight and have the best gain for their size of any antenna. http://www.fractenna.com Also, efficiency isn't everything. For example, the efficiency of the typical mobile HF antenna is fairly lousy because the antenna is a small fraction of a wavelength long. Still, it's the best that can be done on HF without trailing a long wire to a balloon, and dragging a grounding plate. http://www.k0bg.com/eff.html -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Art Unwin" wrote in message ... Tom, W8ji apparently is an expert with antennas having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, apparently Art, The only place I have ever read that on Tom's site is related to Beverage antennas- the statement is true, and for obvious (to most of us) reasons. Dale W4OP |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 17:21:34 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:54:05 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin wrote: Tom, W8ji apparently is an expert with antennas having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, Using Google, I couldn't find any statement resembling the "straight radiators" claim. Oh wait. Maybe he was referring to the mounting pole: http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/HC8B4F-AnCQF6I_u0k3MYg -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Art Unwin wrote:
On Aug 30, 5:15Â*pm, wrote: Art Unwin wrote: Tom, W8ji Â*apparently is an expert with antennas Â*having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, I highly doubt he ever said anything of the sort. As long as you turn a blind eye to what he states then you are in good shape! But then somebody in this group will point you to Tom's statement and you can then respond as to what he really meant which is not what he stated. I highly doubt that will ever happen either. apparently a break off from the standard ham statements of bigger is better as well as more wire is better. And the physical reality that antenna performance is directly related to size in wavelengths. It depends on your definition of "size". I prefer the term encapsulating volume. Yeah, sure. snip rest -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 30, 7:21*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:54:05 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin wrote: Tom, W8ji *apparently is an expert with antennas *having lectured at Dayton and has authored many technical articles around antennas, states that radiators must be straight for maximum efficiency, He might have been talking about small antennas: That may have been at the back of his mind but he did not stipulate that http://www.w8ji.com/radiation_resistance.htm "Small antennas require extraordinary care to obtain high efficiency." Very true for electrically small antennas with emphasis on electrically. The 2004 Dayton PowerPoint presentation is at: http://www.w8ji.com/Dayton/Limited%20Space%20Antennas.ppt Using Google, I couldn't find any statement resembling the "straight radiators" claim. I never said this is a quote from the Dayton lecture. Tom has numorous dissertations with regard to antennas Ummm... fractal antennas are anything but straight and have the best gain for their size of any antenna. http://www.fractenna.com That is what Chip states for his company but I have no idea how a fractal would work on top band. Most on this group deride the claims of Chip with more than a handful of insults Also, efficiency isn't everything. *For example, the efficiency of the typical mobile HF antenna is fairly lousy because the antenna is a small fraction of a wavelength long. Exactly because it takes a WL or multiple there of to attain equilibrium * Still, it's the best that can be done on HF without trailing a long wire to a balloon, and dragging a grounding plate. * No. You are incorrect in my eyes! A multiple of a wavelength does not require a ground plain and can be condensed into any shape or form whilst retaining the required equilibrium. This is per the laws of Maxwell when considering all forces involved in radiation for maximum efficiency. Regards Art http://www.k0bg.com/eff.html -- Jeff Liebermann * * 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|