![]() |
Standing waves
Art Unwin wrote:
On Sep 23, 3:06 pm, Registered User wrote: snip operate. Your idle speculation based upon incomplete information serves no purpose.http://tinyurl.com/clxl9t Fine. Your correct and I am wrong.That should make you feel good It matters little to me that my thoughts are different than yours so that is the end of it. Have a happy day RU 1 Art minus several thousand Apologies to Douglas Adams for the minor ripoff. tom K0TAR |
Standing waves
Richard Fry wrote:
On Sep 23, 1:12 pm, Szczepan Białek wrote: The simplest dipole is a transmissing line (the two wires). Not so. A transmission line with balanced currents is not a dipole, and does not / cannot produce the radiated fields of a dipole. Yes, no matter what the conditions on an ideal transmission line, the two currents are equal in magnitude and opposite phase. Therefore, zero radiation from an ideal transmission line. At the ends of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current and reflected currents are equal in amplitude and opposite phase. Therefore, destructive interference with no radiation. At the center of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current and reflected current are in phase and interfere constructively. Therefore, RADIATION! -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Standing waves
tom wrote:
And it makes a lot more sense than your statement, although he could have worded it better. Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-) -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Standing waves
On Sep 23, 7:09*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
At the ends of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current and reflected currents are equal in amplitude and opposite phase. Therefore, destructive interference with no radiation. At the center of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current and reflected current are in phase and interfere constructively. Therefore, RADIATION! Just to note that far-field radiation is produced, to some extent, from all distances between the two ends of a 1/2WL linear dipole and its feedpoint terminals. RF |
Standing waves
Cecil Moore wrote:
tom wrote: And it makes a lot more sense than your statement, although he could have worded it better. Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-) Apology accepted. And I know you can't help it. ;) |
Standing waves
Richard Fry wrote:
Just to note that far-field radiation is produced, to some extent, from all distances between the two ends of a 1/2WL linear dipole and its feedpoint terminals. Yes, if I am not mistaken, MOM assumes that the radiation from each segment is proportional to the net current in the segment. The maximum radiation comes from the segment in which the forward and reflected currents are in phase. The minimum radiation comes from the segment in which the forward and reflected currents are out of phase. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Standing waves
tom wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-) Apology accepted. And I know you can't help it. ;) Yep, Ah rekon Ah'm gonna amble over yonder directly. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Standing waves
Cecil Moore wrote:
tom wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-) Apology accepted. And I know you can't help it. ;) Yep, Ah rekon Ah'm gonna amble over yonder directly. Oh you silly Texans. |
Standing waves
On Sep 23, 5:46*am, Szczepan Białek wrote:
Physics of radiation is unknown. Perhaps to you at this point, but not to many others who read the posts here and elsewhere. RF |
Standing waves
Szczepan BiaĆek wrote:
Physics of radiation is unknown. Antennas are the nice apparatus to analyse it. The physics has been known for a very long time now. You are a babbling idiot. For me the magnetic field is the illusion. Any semblance to reality of your "thinking" is an illusion. snip My description is shorter: The supply unit sends the voltage pulses (in opposite phase) in the transmissing line. If such pulses collide the voltage is doubled and the strong radiation take place. In straight radiator the forward pulse collides with the reflected. In folded dipoles with that from the other wire. S* Yet more babbling nonsense of an idiot kook. Did you tire of being constantly spanked for being a babbling kook in sci.physics and decide maybe your chances of being accepted are better in an amateur group? Guess what, a lot of amateurs are engineers and actually understand the theory. Hell, even those that are not engineers obviously understand it a hell of a lot better than you do. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com