| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
October 20th 04, 05:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... wrote: Would you please describe for me the physical arrangement of an IDEAL inductance. Art, picture a dimensionless point in your mind. Define that point as an inductance without dimensions, without capacitance, and without resistance. I'll stop right there, Dimensionless objects which relies on proximity effects is beyond my ken. To use this as an aproach of dimensional devices with NEC to prove something is like building on sand This is like using complex circuitry and ignoring connection lines that radiate. In mathematics we use a mythical addition of root minus one as a sort of gimmic to solve a problem but we always remove the gimic before the real world answers are given, yet you want to keep the gimmic, ala an imaginary thing which is dimensionless and thus has zero proximity effects even tho proximitry effects is what generates inductance in a dimensionless form. And you want me to use this imaginary dimensionless aproach with NEC which deals with the real world where inductance cannot be dimensionless ? This is where the coil argument started since the field density inside a coil is more than that at any point physically and dimensionaly outside the coil which leads to lumped load errors. I am hoping that Ian will address the question in a more serious way and not as a way to buttress a personal agenda. I suppose I should have made it a seperate posting so it would not be perceived in taking sides e.t.c. Actually I modelled the coil to real world dimensions with a NEC program with copious segments that supplied current levels at multiple points around each turn to get my answers which this thread now suggests that NEC answers could me incorrect thus I am following the thread but not partaking in it. My personal belief is that making EZNEC a part of the debate is a mistake since it contains boundaries that most NEC computor do not have and the coil problem is outside its useable boundaries or imposed limits.If a lumped load is viewed as dimensionless then a computor can be excused as supplying a dimensionless response which can evoke a 'garbage in....' type comment. Like most technical things there is nothing wrong with the use of items such as EZNEC within the limits prescribed by Roy and the coil question is outside the useable limits of the EZNEC program. This response is not meant to be personal to anybody or any program mentioned Art There is your "IDEAL inductance" and exists ONLY in the human mind and certain computer models. Since it is dimensionless, the current into the point and the current out of the point are the same current because they are the same point and, of course, the dimensionless point is traversed instantaneously. Now, without modification, extend that dimensionless concept to a one-foot diameter, one-foot long bugcatcher coil, wound with 60 feet of real-world wire. Assert that the bugcatcher coil has virtually identical characteristics to that previous dimensionless point in your mind. Use a computer model's dimensionless inductor feature to prove your point. That's the present "physical arrangement". :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Lumped Load Models v. Distributed Coils | Antenna | |||
| Current in antenna loading coils controversy | Antenna | |||
| Eznec modeling loading coils? | Antenna | |||
Threaded Mode
