I have just come to realise that if one drew a polygon of element phases in
a array
and all elements were 180 degrees to its companion element and excluding the
driven element, the max gain and max front to back will occur at the SAME
frequency!
Until now I was of the understanding that these two max figures could not
occur at
the same frequency. Is there anything written about this possibility?
Regards
Art

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 05:41:29 GMT, "
wrote:

I have just come to realise that if one drew a polygon of element phases in
a array
and all elements were 180 degrees to its companion element and excluding the
driven element, the max gain and max front to back will occur at the SAME
frequency!
Until now I was of the understanding that these two max figures could not
occur at
the same frequency. Is there anything written about this possibility?
Regards
Art

OK Art,

This posting has been swinging in the wind for a couple of days now.
Given that you threw your frustration in my face that no one shows any
interest in it. Stop blaming them for their failure to recognize your
genius and get down from Calvary - blame me instead! ;-)

WTF do you mean by
if one drew a polygon of element phases in a array
and WTF should we care?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

...
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 05:41:29 GMT, "
wrote:

I have just come to realise that if one drew a polygon of element phases
in
a array
and all elements were 180 degrees to its companion element and excluding
the
driven element, the max gain and max front to back will occur at the SAME
frequency!
Until now I was of the understanding that these two max figures could not
occur at
the same frequency. Is there anything written about this possibility?
Regards
Art

OK Art,

This posting has been swinging in the wind for a couple of days now.
Given that you threw your frustration in my face that no one shows any
interest in it.

Not frustration It just shows that no one is aware of any mention of it
in antenna books per my question.We have many experts and antenna book
owners among the group and if one had seen mention of it they would
have replied
It would appear that I have come across something new.
How about that ?



WTF do you mean by
if one drew a polygon of element phases in a array
and WTF should we care?

If your interest is in provoking auguments rather than exploring the
"new " then you will have to go else where. I know who you are and
what you are by personal experience so don't expect that your
tactics will work with me. If you are civil and stick to the subject at
hand then we have communication otherwise forget it.

The posting on TOA has hosted a lot of comment besides yours
and another that point to it as meaningless.Actually
Mac has now added very interesting info that has even got the
attention of Reg which is in my book shows that there is really
an interest which is also evidenced by the extra large number
of postings.
End of discussion

Art KB9MZ



73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:02:18 GMT, "
wrote:

It would appear that I have come across something new.

No wonder no one came to this party.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 17:21:26 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

|On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:02:18 GMT, "
wrote:
|
|It would appear that I have come across something new.
|
|No wonder no one came to this party.

It could be new, but he can't tell us about, so how do we know?

Wes,
I described a polygon of element phases where pairs of elements were equal
and opposite and where the director was either alone or was joined by
another
element of the same phase. This polygon aproach was used often before the
computor era A polygon as described above not only makes for a wide single
direction lobe but enforces among other things the same frequency for both
parameters i.e. gain and f/b
If such a polygon can be drawn as stated above it shows that it is possible.
I don't see how anything can be added to the above to emphasise the point
I am making which is why I asked if anybody knew of any book references to
the above.
If you are not aware of the phase polygon aproach I can find you a
reference. or, if you prefer;
a simulated diagram of a polygon that illustrates my point .
If that is beyond your ken I could also mail to you a computor compilation
of
phase and currents of an array that also illustrates my point.
But my main question still remains a pointer to a technical article that
discusses the possibility or impossibility of what I have stated.
If you have a deeper interest in the subject I could supply
to you alone the whole computor model of such an antenna
and a photograph of the actual antenna which is for 20 meters.
All I would ask for is complete privacy of what I provide as I
have a further pursuit connected with the above.
Regards
Art


Stewart" *n7ws*@ yahoo.com wrote in message
...
On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 17:21:26 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

|On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:02:18 GMT, "
wrote:
|
|It would appear that I have come across something new.
|
|No wonder no one came to this party.

It could be new, but he can't tell us about, so how do we know?

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:02:18 GMT, "
wrote:
It would appear that I have come across something new.

"Kraus forgive them,
For they know not where they've polygon wrong"

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:02:18 GMT, "
wrote:
It would appear that I have come across something new.

"Kraus forgive them,
For they know not where they've polygon wrong"

You said it...This is hilarious...Better than the comedy
channel.. Poor ole Art just doesn't get it...At all...
It wouldn't matter what we said, if it does not align with
his thinking, we are all ignorant, or we are trying to
crucify him to a rohn 45 tower...It doesn't matter that
the problem has nothing to do with polygons, phased arrays,
or anything else under the sun. The problem is he wants to
keep his "device" a secret, so he can claim it a new
invention. So he's afraid to give any details at all.
In doing this, he fails to realize no one has a clue to what
he is trying to describe 92% of the time...Myself, I think
this is just another round the world attempt to justify the
validity of that Rube Goldburg looking antenna he has been
trying to plug since whenever....Years it would seem...
MK

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 05:41:29 GMT, "
wrote:

I have just come to realise that if one drew a polygon of element phases in
a array
and all elements were 180 degrees to its companion element and excluding the
driven element, the max gain and max front to back will occur at the SAME
frequency!
Until now I was of the understanding that these two max figures could not
occur at
the same frequency. Is there anything written about this possibility?
Regards
Art



Art,

Your description is too vague for someone who doesn't have some form
of reference (maybe this is a continuation of a discussion from
elsewhere?) Anyway, since a polygon is any shape with more than two
sides in which all sides and angles are equal, this leaves a rather
wide variety of shapes. Is this referencing vertical or horizontal
elements? With the 180 degree element comparisons, I assume you are
dealing with an equal number of sides on each polygon, or in case of
verticals, at least an equal number of elements..


Is there any more you can tell us?


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

"Buck" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 05:41:29 GMT, "
wrote:

I have just come to realise that if one drew a polygon of element phases
in
a array
and all elements were 180 degrees to its companion element and excluding
the
driven element, the max gain and max front to back will occur at the SAME
frequency!
Until now I was of the understanding that these two max figures could not
occur at
the same frequency. Is there anything written about this possibility?
Regards
Art



Art,

Your description is too vague for someone who doesn't have some form
of reference (maybe this is a continuation of a discussion from
elsewhere?) Anyway, since a polygon is any shape with more than two
sides in which all sides and angles are equal,


It does! then I have used the incorrect term.

In a yagi type diagram you can calculate the current and phase of each
elemrnt
but what one is interested in is the summation of the whole array and you
can do this
in the same way as you would do a vector diagram of forces.
With the yagi array you would first start with the reflector and draw to
scale a line
reflecting both phase angle and magnitude. You then add lines in cosecutive
order for all other elements in the array. The end of this 'toe to tail'
some what
erratic line will finish up some distance from the starting point,
but this distance, if drawn, represents the phase and magnitude
of the array as a whole. As a former mechanical engineer
but now nothing ,I was taught the term "polygon of forces" which is a
cumulative
vector array but the shape did not necessarily consist of "equal "sides as
you stated..
But then I am English born and it is known that Americans completely messed
up the Elizabethan era language which a true cockney still adheres to ,
where as
others in the same country have learned to talk in such a way it sounds as
if they
are trying to retain a marble in their mouth.without swallowing it.
Regards
Art


this leaves a rather
wide variety of shapes. Is this referencing vertical or horizontal
elements? With the 180 degree element comparisons, I assume you are
dealing with an equal number of sides on each polygon, or in case of
verticals, at least an equal number of elements..


Is there any more you can tell us?


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW